The Chief Judge of the District Court of Western Australia, Julie Wager, has detailed a range of serious and escalating technology failures within the District Court Building in Perth.
Chief Judge Wager told the Law Society the failures have resulted in repeated adjournments, interruptions to hearings, and significant distress for those involved – and that the issues are having a profound and detrimental impact on complainants, witnesses, and accused persons, many of whom are among the most vulnerable in our justice system.
Her Honour provided specific examples of how these technology failures are impacting court proceedings, with the below examples all occurring across five consecutive sitting days in November last year.
Chief Judge Wager said judges are starting earlier, sitting later, and changing break times to mitigate delays and meet workload demands, placing additional pressures on counsel, the accused, witnesses, jurors, judges and staff.
Attorney General Dr Tony Buti MLA told Brief he recognises the importance of reliable courtroom technology in supporting the delivery of justice.
“I have personally met with several heads of jurisdiction on this matter,” he said. “Technology is a significant consideration in the Department of Justice’s infrastructure planning, and the Department continues to manage systems across all court and tribunal facilities within our allocated resources. The Department is working closely with the judiciary to minimise disruptions and explore practical solutions.”
| Examples of technology failures in the District Court during a one-week sitting period in November 2025 |
|---|
| In a five-day trial for multiple counts of aggravated sexual penetration without consent (within a domestic relationship), the complainant’s evidence took four days to complete due to repeated technology failures. The trial moved courtrooms three times, and the complainant was required to relocate between remote witness rooms several times. Sensitive and explicit material required for cross-examination could not be shown promptly, necessitating further delays. The issues were so frequent and prolonged that the trial judge made arrangements to seat the complainant in the courtroom with the accused behind a whiteboard as a makeshift screen. Fortunately, a link to a remote witness room was eventually able to be established, however the court has since discovered blackouts in the recorded evidence. |
| In a separate trial for sexual offences, the complainant had to move between remote rooms mid-testimony due to connection failures. Further issues arose even after moving to a different remote room. Ultimately, the complainant was required to give their evidence over significant audio static, resulting in multiple portions of the evidence being unable to be transcribed. |
| Audio static issues affected multiple courtrooms, forcing another judge to move courtrooms mid-hearing and leaving a civilian witness waiting to connect from a regional courthouse for over an hour. |
| Two sentencing hearings for accused persons in custody were adjourned to later dates because the court could not establish video links to prisons. |
| During a pre-recording in a matter involving four co-accused charged with aggravated sexual penetration without consent, an intellectually disabled complainant’s evidence was delayed and repeatedly interrupted by an unstable connection with the remote room. The complainant had to be moved to a child witness room midway through their testimony due to the lack of functioning adult remote rooms. Due to the repeated technology failures, the witness’ testimony took two full days to be taken. Two days later, a second special witness in the same matter faced the same delays and disruptions and was also required to move to a child witness room during their evidence. |
| A special witness in a burglary and assault trial waited nearly an hour due to remote room failures and was forced to give evidence with severely limited functionality. Due to the volume of court-wide issues, an AV technician could not attend in person, and a second technician was called later in the day. |
| There have been recurring issues facilitating audio links for the Abuse Claims list in the civil jurisdiction. The presiding registrar has been unable to conduct audio links for the dedicated case management list for historical child sexual abuse claims under the National Redress Scheme. |
| Judges and staff have been unable to access audio recordings since 13 November 2025 due to server error. By late November, no solution had been identified and court audio remained inaccessible to the judiciary and staff in the ordinary manner. Fortunately, master backup recordings could be accessed upon specific request. |
| Due to technology failure, for approximately one hour on 17 November 2025 the court was unable to conduct any proceedings requiring video or audio link. Multiple court proceedings were affected. |
| On Friday 21 November, there were issues in three separate jury deliberation rooms that meant the jury kiosk was unable to connect to the television to display evidence. Two deliberating juries needed to be removed from the room and taken to another location so the issues could be resolved. |
Law Society CEO Kate Wellington said the examples provided demonstrate that these issues are creating additional and unnecessary distress for complainants and witnesses, many of whom are vulnerable, as well as adding to the burden on lawyers.
“It’s distressing that these technology failures are becoming so frequent and are impacting some of the most vulnerable in the court system,” she said.
“We also know there are significant capacity pressures on criminal lawyers in WA. Adding technology issues to the mix – causing further pressure and delays – isn’t helping.”
Funding for court facilities formed a key part of the Law Society’s State Election Platform in the lead-up to the March election, with the Law Society strongly advocating for additional funding to improve court resources and infrastructure across the state.
Wellington said technology is now an integral part of court proceedings, and that functioning technology should be a baseline expectation for all within the court system, including judges, practitioners and their clients.
“Technology – especially the basics like audio-visual links – are critical to ensuring accessibility and efficiency of court proceedings,” Wellington said. “This now needs urgent attention.”
