Law 2026 - Year 9 Civics (3)
AUSTRALIA’S JUSTICE SYSTEM
Onderdelen in deze les
AUSTRALIA’S JUSTICE SYSTEM
WHAT’S IN THIS UNIT?
01
03
02
04
Overview of the Australian Legal System
South Australia’s
Court System
Australia’s Court System
What happens in Court?
ASSESSMENT
PRINCIPLES OF JUSTICE
These scales symbolise fairness, equity and balance in judgements. They weigh up the needs and interests of individuals and society.
Justice is impartial; wealth, status and emotion are not considered in reaching decisions.
COLLECT FOLIO NOW
Complete Q1
What is the Rule of Law?
At its most basic level, the rule of law is the concept that both the government and citizens know the law and obey it.
‘Equality Before the Law’
The law should apply to all people equally regardless of their status in society – rich or poor, young or old, regardless of their gender, race, culture, religion, or any other attribute.
All citizens must enjoy equality before the law and be subject to the laws of Australia.
PRINCIPLES OF THE RULE OF LAW
THE MAGNA CARTA
From the Magna Carta we have the principle that all citizens, including those in power, should be fairly and equally ruled by the law.
Equality before the Law and the principles from the Magna Carta that no-one is above the law and that laws must be applied equally and fairly, became key legal principles of the English justice system.
Complete Q2
SEPARATION OF POWERS
The Separation of Powers is a system that divides government power into three separate branches.
This stops one person or group from having too much power.
Each branch has a different role, but they must work together to run the country fairly.
THE POWERS ARE:
POWERS IN ACTION
Parliament debates and votes on a new law
A court decides what a law means
A minister creates rules to apply a law
The Prime Minister votes on a bill
Government departments enforce road laws
A judge rules a law is unconstitutional
Decide if each of the following statements is a function of the Legislature, Executive, or Judiciary.
Legislature
Judiciary
Executive
Legislature
Executive
Judiciary
Notice that the Prime Minister appears in both Legislature and Executive.
The branch depends on the action, not the just person.
The Constitution is the highest law in Australia.
It’s like a rule book for creating rules – it sets up how Australia is governed and creates the rules of the political system.
The Constitution:
Creates the three branches of government (separation of powers)
Explains what powers Parliament has
Divides power between the federal and state governments
Establishes the High Court
Complete Q3
THE CONSTITUTION
WHY OBEY LAWS?
Religious and moral influences
Parental influence
Acceptance that rules are necessary
Fear of sanctions
Certain types of behaviour may be unacceptable or against religious or moral beliefs
Children (when young) seek approval of their parents and usually follow rules set by them
If no one obeys the rules of the game, the game can’t proceed
If everyone did as they pleased, society would become chaotic.
People often obey laws because they are worried about the type of punishment (sanction) they will receive
Because our peers follow certain rules we feel pressure to do the same
Peer group pressure
RIGHTS & RESPONSIBILITIES
No one has the right to act in ways that may cause harm to the rights and freedoms of others
For example, you have a right to drive a car but the responsibility to drive safely
The United Nations has compiled a list of human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which Australia is a signatory
WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?
Every day in the media we hear about people being involved in cases before the courts.
Even if we never commit an offence or become involved in a legal dispute ourselves, we could still find ourselves in contact with the court system, as a witness, to do jury duty, or even just attending court to support someone we know.
Our justice system and the courts are important elements of our democratic society, and it is important that we all have a basic understanding of how they work.
AUSTRALIA’S COURT SYSTEM
02
COURTS
Courts are places where legal disputes are resolved.
They are set up by laws made by Parliament, and they are run by Judges, Justices, or Magistrates. Their job is to make fair decisions by applying the Rule of Law.
Australia has a federal system, which means there are two levels of courts:
Commonwealth (Federal) courts
State and Territory courts
Each level has its own court hierarchy, from lower courts to higher courts.
Even though these systems are separate, they are connected through appeals.
CRIMINAL & CIVIL LAW
Criminal Law
Civil Law
Criminal law protects the community from the harmful actions of others
Civil law deals with non-criminal disputes between individuals or groups.
CRIMINAL LAW
Complete Q4
Criminal law deals with offences against the community, such as theft, assault, or dangerous driving.
When someone is accused of a crime:
The state (police) takes them to court — this is called prosecution.
Courts use an adversarial system, meaning two sides argue their case in front of an independent judge or magistrate.
The two sides are:
Prosecution – must prove the accused is guilty.
Defence – represents the accused and challenges the evidence.
If the court decides the accused is guilty, they receive a punishment, such as a fine, community order, or imprisonment.
If they are not guilty, they are acquitted and go free.
CIVIL LAW
Civil law deals with disputes between individuals, groups, or organisations.
These are not crimes — they are disagreements about rights, responsibilities, and harm caused.
Examples include:
Business or contract disputes, neighbour disagreements and someone being injured because another person was careless.
Civil cases also use the adversarial system, with both sides presenting their arguments to an independent judge.
The two sides are:
Plaintiff – the person making the complaint
Defendant – the person accused of causing the harm
If the plaintiff wins, the defendant may have to pay compensation, fix damage, or stop doing something harmful (an injunction).
Civil cases do not give criminal punishments like jail.
Complete Q5
KEY FEATURES OF THE COURT SYSTEM
Our legal system is made up of many different courts, each with different powers and responsibilities.
These courts are arranged in different levels, in order of their power and importance.
This arrangement is known as a hierarchy.
The higher courts, which hear the most serious matters, are at the top of the hierarchy; the lower courts, which hear less serious matters, are at the bottom of the hierarchy.
AUSTRALIAN COURT HIERARCHY
Courts in Australia Video & Resources | ClickView
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Original jurisdiction refers to the power of a court to hear and decide a case for the first time.
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Appellate jurisdiction refers to the power of a higher court to review and decide whether to uphold, change, or overturn a decision made by a lower court.
FEDERAL COURTS
HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA
FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT AND FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
Which court do you think would hear the following?
1) Murder Cases
2) Road Traffic Offenses
Brainstorm a list of reasons for having different levels of courts rather than allowing all courts to hear any cases.
Folio question 7:
In a short paragraph, analyse why is it important that there is more than one court level in a justice system?
Complete Q7
CUSTOMARY LAW
Complete Q8
Complete the Customary Law section to guide your understanding.
Then answer Question 8.
SOUTH AUSTRALIAN COURTS
SOUTH AUSTRALIA’S COURT STRUCTURE
In South Australia, there are three courts of general jurisdiction: the Magistrates, District and Supreme Court.
Each of these courts hears both civil and criminal matters.
Both the District and Supreme Court have appellate jurisdiction with respect to some matters.
Note the names of some courts have changed to reflect recent changes to the court structure and jurisdiction within South Australia.
SUPREME COURT
DISTRICT COURT
MAGISTRATES COURT
DIFFERENT COURT. DIFFERENT CASE.
DIFFERENT COURT. DIFFERENT CASE.
Complete Q9
CRIMINAL TRIALS
REVISION
In South Australia, there are three courts of general jurisdiction: the Magistrates, District and Supreme Court.
Prosecution = to prove the guilt of the person accused of the crime.
The Defence = the accused has the right to present their side of the argument.
FAIR OR NOT?
An 18-year-old is on trial for vandalism. During the trial, they say nothing in their own defence. The jury finds them not guilty because the prosecution didn’t provide enough evidence.
Discuss/respond:
Fair to the accused?
Fair to the victim (whose property was vandalized)?
Why/Why not?
An 18-year-old is on trial for vandalism. During the trial, they say nothing in their own defence. The jury finds them not guilty because the prosecution didn’t provide enough evidence.
POTENTIAL RESPONSES
Fair to the accused:
“Yes, it’s fair because in Australia the accused has the right to remain silent. The prosecution must prove they’re guilty beyond reasonable doubt. If they can’t do that, the accused should be found not guilty.”
Unfair to the victim:
“No, it’s not fair to the victim whose property was damaged. They probably wanted justice and might feel angry that the person didn't even have to explain themselves but still got off.”
“It’s fair in terms of protecting innocent people from being wrongly convicted, but I can see how it would be frustrating for the victim if they believe the accused was guilty.”
An 18-year-old is on trial for vandalism. During the trial, they say nothing in their own defence. The jury finds them not guilty because the prosecution didn’t provide enough evidence.
FAIR OR NOT?
A 16-year-old accused of assault can’t afford a lawyer. They go to court without any legal representation and lose the case. They are sentenced to 6 months in juvenile detention.
Discuss/respond:
Fair to the accused?
Fair to the victim (whose property was vandalized)?
Why/Why not?
A 16-year-old accused of assault can’t afford a lawyer. They go to court without any legal representation and lose the case. They are sentenced to 6 months in juvenile detention.
POTENTIAL RESPONSES
Fair to the accused:
“This is definitely unfair to the accused. A 16-year-old won’t know how to argue in court properly. Everyone should have the right to a lawyer no matter how much money they have.”
Unfair to the victim:
“It’s fair to the victim because someone was held responsible for the assault, but it’s still worrying if the trial wasn’t fair.”
“It might be fair that the case was heard, but if the accused didn’t have a lawyer, it’s hard to say they had a proper chance to defend themselves.”
A 16-year-old accused of assault can’t afford a lawyer. They go to court without any legal representation and lose the case. They are sentenced to 6 months in juvenile detention.
FAIR OR NOT
A man is accused of stealing a phone. He pleads not guilty. He must wait 8 months in jail before his trial begins because he can’t afford bail. Eventually, he is found not guilty.
Discuss/respond:
Fair to the accused?
Fair to the victim (whose property was vandalized)?
Why/Why not?
A man is accused of stealing a phone.
He pleads not guilty.
He must wait 8 months in jail before his trial begins because he can’t afford bail.
Eventually, he is found not guilty.
POTENTIAL RESPONSES
Fair to the accused:
“That’s completely unfair. He lost 8 months of his life even though he was innocent. Bail should be about fairness, not how rich you are.”
Unfair to the victim:
“The victim probably thought the person who stole their phone was being punished, but in the end, it turns out they got it wrong. That’s unfair to both sides.”
“I get that people might need to be kept in custody if there’s a risk, but if someone’s innocent, they shouldn’t be sitting in jail just because they’re poor.”
A man is accused of stealing a phone.
He pleads not guilty.
He must wait 8 months in jail before his trial begins because he can’t afford bail.
Eventually, he is found not guilty.
KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
purpose
To protect individuals from being treated as guilty until the prosecution proves otherwise. It ensures that people are not punished or judged unfairly based on accusations alone.
Benefit to the accused
The accused doesn’t have to prove they are innocent — they’re treated as innocent by default. This can be frustrating for victims who feel sure the person is guilty but see them being protected until trial.
Presumption of Innocence
KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
purpose
To prevent the accused from being forced to say anything that might incriminate them. It protects them from self-incrimination and ensures that speaking is voluntary.
Benefit to the accused
The accused can choose not to explain or defend themselves, even if the victim and their supporters want answers or a confession. This can feel unfair to victims who want the truth
Right to Silence
KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
purpose
To ensure that all accused people can be properly defended in court, especially since the legal system is complex and hard to navigate alone.
Benefit to the accused
The state pays for legal aid if the accused can’t afford a lawyer, but victims don’t always receive the same level of support or representation, which can seem one-sided.
Right to Legal Representation
KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
purpose
To make sure the trial is open, transparent, and follows just procedures so that the outcome is trustworthy and fair.
Benefit to the accused
Trials are focused on protecting the accused's rights. Victims may feel sidelined or retraumatised during cross-examinations, and they don’t control how the case is run.
Right to a Fair and Public Trial
KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
purpose
To ensure no one is convicted unless the evidence is very strong. It protects innocent people from being wrongly punished.
Benefit to the accused
Even if there’s strong suspicion or emotional impact on the victim, the accused will be acquitted unless the evidence is completely convincing. This can be disheartening for victims who don’t get “justice.”
Burden of proof on prosecution
KEY RIGHTS OF THE ACCUSED
CASE STUDY
At 3:30 p.m. on a Wednesday, a phone is reported stolen from a Year 12 student’s bag in the school library. CCTV footage shows 17-year-old Alex Chen walking past the bag just minutes before the theft was discovered. A few hours later, police visit Alex’s home, but they do not find the phone. Alex is charged with theft based on circumstantial evidence.
Prosecution Summary:
The prosecution argues that Alex had both the opportunity and motive to take the phone. A student claims Alex said earlier that day that they “really needed a new phone.” CCTV footage shows Alex near the victim’s bag minutes before it went missing. No one else was seen going near the bag during that time. The prosecution says Alex is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Defence Summary:
The defence argues that there is no direct evidence linking Alex to the theft — only circumstantial evidence. Alex chose to remain silent during police questioning, which is within their legal rights. The defence points out that the phone was never found, and that the CCTV doesn’t actually show Alex touching the bag. They argue that the evidence is not strong enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
CASE STUDY
Who is the accused in this trial?
What rights of the accused were used?
What evidence is being used by the prosecution?
What is the defence arguing?
If you were on the jury, what would the verdict be? Why?
Do you think the trial process was fair to both the accused and the victim? Why/why not?
CASE STUDY
Who is the accused in this trial? Alex Chen
What rights of the accused were used? Presumption of innocence, right to silence, right to legal representation, burden of proof on prosecution.
What evidence is being used by the prosecution? CCTV footage showing Alex near the bag, witness statement about Alex wanting a new phone.
What is the defence arguing? There is no direct evidence, Alex used the right to silence, and the CCTV doesn’t prove theft.
If you were on the jury, what would the verdict be? Why? Justify using the standard of “beyond reasonable doubt.
Do you think the trial process was fair to both the accused and the victim? Why/why not? Consider both perspectives.
TO WHAT EXTENT DOES THE AUSTRALIAN CRIMINAL TRIAL PROCESS FAVOUR THE ACCUSED?
Complete Q10
THE JURY
KEY VOCABULARY
WHAT IS A JURY?
A jury is a group of 12 ordinary people chosen randomly from the electoral roll each month. They are not lawyers or judges—they are members of the public, just like you.
Their role is to listen carefully to the evidence presented in court. They must decide the facts of the case based only on what they see and hear during the trial, ensuring a fair trial for everyone.
A CIVIC REQUIREMENT
It's the Law
In South Australia, serving on a jury is compulsory if you are summoned. It is a serious legal obligation, not just a choice.
Why is it Required?
The justice system relies on the community to participate. Without jurors, the system cannot function fairly. It is considered a cornerstone of our democracy.
WHY DOESN’T A JUDGE DO IT?
COMMUNITY VALUES
A jury reflects a diverse range of life experiences and opinions from the public, not just the government or a single judge. This protects individuals from potential bias.
DEMOCRATIC VALUES
Having ordinary people decide verdicts acts as a check on the government and legal system. By serving, you help uphold the rule of law and protect the rights of others.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Jury service is a civic duty and a legal requirement in South Australia.
Jurors are ordinary people who listen to evidence and decide the verdict.
The system relies on community participation to ensure fairness.
A unanimous verdict is usually required in criminal trials.
Complete Q11
THE CROWN v MERCER
Where there’s smoke…
…there’s fire
Complete Q12 & 13
Imagine yourself as a Jury member deciding the outcome of the Crown v Mercer case.
Carefully read the Case Briefing, then answer folio question 12 and 13.
ACCESS TO JUSTICE
Definition:
Access to justice means everyone can get high quality legal help or solve legal problems fairly.
The Law Council says this includes:
Getting the right legal information
Knowing when you have a legal problem
Getting help from a lawyer
Understanding the legal process
Having a voice when laws are made
THINK-PAIR-SHARE
Why is access to justice important in a fair society?
Judges should consider a person’s background when sentencing.
Money should not affect the outcome of a court case.
All people living in Australia have the same access to justice.
Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Strongly Disagree
Disagree
4 CORNERS
FACTORS THAT AFFECT ACCESS
What might prevent someone from accessing justice?
WHO FACES BARRIERS TO JUSTICE?
Instructions:
In an assigned group, research your allocated social group --->
Explore:
What legal problems might they face?
What barriers might they experience?
How does their experience compare to the 5 elements of justice?
Your group will present to the class.
In a paragraph, respond to the prompt:
“ALL PEOPLE LIVING IN AUSTRALIA HAVE THE SAME ACCESS TO JUSTCE”
Include the perspective of a social group such as Indigenous Australians, youths, migrants etc. Is the prompt true for this social group? Why?
Complete Q14
