VPRS 10615 Court of Petty Sessions Special Complaints Register

The special jurisdiction of Courts of Petty Sessions was formally established by the Justices' Act 1928. From this time there were two mechanisms within Courts of Petty Sessions/Magistrates Courts for the redress of civil complaints.The "ordinary jurisdiction empowered the court to determine cases for damages or debts where the precise amount of the claim could be determined according to some objective scale. An example would be the recovery of a debt for goods delivered. Claims brought to court in the ordinary civil jurisdiction often used the system of judgement by default. This system provided that where a respondent did not respond to a summons by giving notice of his or her intention to defend the claim, a judgement could be made in favour of the complainant without a formal court hearing.In its "special jurisdiction the court itself determined the appropriate amount of redress and operated within a higher jurisdictional limit. Claims for damages arising out of a motor vehicle accident were typically handled in the special jurisdiction. In the special jurisdiction a stipendiary magistrate would preside rather than justices of the peace.The Magistrates' Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Act 1979 abolished the distinction between ordinary and special complaints and established a single civil jurisdiction.A separate register was required to be kept for recording special complaints. Special Complaints Registers are generally in a common format, giving details of the case number, the name of the complainant, the name of the respondent, how the case came to the court (type and date of summons), a description of the cause or proceeding, the decision or order and any remarks. In order to authenticate entries made in the register the presiding stipendiary magistrate signed it at the end of each day.In about 1990 separate 'default', and 'special' civil complaints were abolished and a single type of complaint register was established encompassing both liquidated and unliquidated claims.

1928年《治安法官法》（Justices' Act 1928）正式确立了小额裁判法院（Courts of Petty Sessions）的专属管辖权。自此，小额裁判法院/治安裁判法院（Magistrates Courts）内设有两种处理民事申诉的机制。“普通管辖权”赋予法院审理损害赔偿或债务案件的权限，此类案件的索赔金额可依据客观标准予以确定，例如追讨已交付货物的欠款。依普通民事管辖权向法院提起的索赔，通常适用缺席判决制度：若被告未以提交答辩通知的方式对传票作出回应，则法院可不经正式庭审直接作出有利于原告的判决。“专属管辖权”下，法院可自行确定合理的救济金额，且受更高的管辖限额约束；因机动车交通事故产生的损害赔偿索赔，通常由专属管辖权程序处理，且该程序由领薪治安法官（stipendiary magistrate）主持，而非非专业治安法官（justices of the peace）。1979年《治安裁判法院（民事管辖权）法》（Magistrates' Courts (Civil Jurisdiction) Act 1979）废除了普通申诉与专属申诉的区分，确立了统一的民事管辖权，彼时需单独设立登记簿以记录专属管辖权下的申诉案件。专属申诉登记簿通常采用统一格式，需记录案件编号、原告姓名、被告姓名、案件受理方式（传票类型与签发日期）、案由或诉讼程序说明、判决或裁定内容以及备注信息。为确保登记簿中登记内容的真实性，每日庭审结束后，主持庭审的领薪治安法官需对登记簿进行签名确认。约1990年，单独的“缺席”与“专属”民事申诉制度被废除，取而代之的是统一的申诉登记簿，可涵盖已确定金额索赔（liquidated claims）与未确定金额索赔（unliquidated claims）两类案件。