Revolutionizing family courts: Catalysts for reform and the transformative role of technology

• Published date: 01 April 2024
• Author: Tom Altobelli,Erin McKenna,Isabel Suh
• Date: 01 April 2024
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/fcre.12783

SPECIAL FEATURE

Revolutionizing family courts: Catalysts for reform

and the transformative role of technology

Tom Altobelli | Erin McKenna | Isabel Suh

C/O Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, Sydney, Australia

Correspondence

Tom Altobelli, C/O Federal Circuit and Family

Court of Australia, 97-99 Goulburn Street,

Sydney, New South Wales 2000, Australia.

Email: associate.justicealtobelli@fcfcoa.gov.au

Abstract

This article examines the multiple inter-connected and inter-

acting catalysts for past, current and future family court

reform. We then, with deep humility and quiet ambition,

contemplate the next 50 years and hypothesize about

future court reform which we predict will focus on technol-

ogy. We observe how what was once a fanciful idea for

family courts (such as electronic filing and online court

events) is realistic today. We contend that, in a similar vein,

the technological reforms postulated in this article (such as

judgment writing assisted by artificial intelligence) may

become the reality of the future.

1

KEYWORDS

artificial intelligence, catalysts for reform, future family court

reform, metaverse, technology

Key points for the family court community

•There are myriad direct, indirect, and interacting catalysts

for family court reform, past, present and in some cases

ongoing into the future such as social changes, funding

and resources, and the need for efficiency.

•Artificial intelligence (“AI”) will likely automate and

replace key functions including information gathering

and lower-level decision-making but, in other areas, it

will support, rather than replace judicial officers as it

1

The views expressed by the authors are their personal views expressed in an academic context only, not theviews of their employer. In particular, the

views expressed by Altobelli are not expressed in a judicial capacity.

DOI: 10.1111/fcre.12783

© 2024 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

Family Court Rev. 2024;62:321–342. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/fcre 321

simply cannot have the same function and effect as

human judicial officers.

•We contend that as AI and the metaverse develops and

improves, it will reconceptualise the need for a physical

courtroom.

•Family courts have no choice but to embrace technologi-

cal change and complexity in the next 50 years even if

for no other reason than to manage the more problem-

atic aspects of emerging technology that will inevitably

be used by lawyers and litigants.

INTRODUCTION

Family is the “natural and fundamental group unit of society”

2

and there has been continuous structural and systemic

reform of the family law system around the world to adapt to change and better meet the needs of separating fami-

lies.

3

Despite this, international leaders such as Salem seemingly lament that notwithstanding such significant change

and reform, many challenges persist.

4

What do we mean by “family court reform”in this article? Perhaps the concept is far easier to describe than

define given the enormous diversity in which family courts operate.

5

For present purposes an inclusive description

will be adopted.

We agree with Babb that “family court”is a term with no agreed meaning but may be described most simply as

a single forum within which to adjudicate the full range of family law issues based on the notion that a court's effec-

tiveness and efficiency increases when the court resolves a family's legal problems in as few appearances as possi-

ble.

6

As will be seen, however, this vision of the family court is an idealized one and often difficult to implement. It is

axiomatic that family courts apply family law.

7

Family court reform may be described as the process of examining the laws,

8

legal systems or structures that

pertain to families (in the broadest sense of that word) and advocating for change to make those laws, legal systems,

2

Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) s 43(b) (Austl.).

3

Austl. L. Reform Comm'n [ALRC], Family Law for the Future: An Inquiry into the Family Law System, ALRC Report No. 135 (April 10, 2019), https://www.

alrc.gov.au/publication/family-law-report/.

4

Peter Salem states, “The United States is…persistently called upon to implement more dramatic system change. Canada's Family Justice Working Group

(FJWG) (2013) of the Action Committee on Access to Justice in Family and Civil Matters cites precisely the same situation”. Peter Salem, The Challenges of

Family Court Service Reform,52F

AM.CT.REV. 670, 671 (2014).

5

The Australian family law system is much more confined than others, in that it largely only deals with matters arising after the breakdown of a relationship

and must engage in a complex interaction with state and territory laws regarding family violence and child protection. Other jurisdictions, such as

Singapore, New Zealand and many states of the USA (which are unitary legal systems) deal with a wider range of family-related issues extending to matters

such as adoption and guardianship, juvenile justice, probate and succession, and elder abuse. Nevertheless, the subject of court reform applies in all

contexts.

6

Paul A. Williams, referred to in Barbara A. Babb, Fashioning an Interdisciplinary Framework for Court Reform in Family Law: A Blueprint to Construct a Unified

Family Court, noting that the author uses the word “define”whereas we have chosen the word “described”. Barbara A. Babb, Fashioning an Interdisciplinary

Framework for Court Reform in Family Law: A Blueprint to Construct a Unified Family Court,71S.C

AL.L.REV. 469, 478–79 (1998).

7

Babb defines family law as meaning a comprehensive approach to family law subject matter jurisdiction, including jurisdiction over cases involving divorce,

annulment, and property distribution; child custody and visitation; alimony and child support; paternity, adoption, and termination of parental rights;

juvenile causes juvenile delinquency, child abuse, and child neglect; domestic violence; criminal non-support; name change; guardianship of minors and

disabled persons; and withholding or withdrawal of life-sustaining medical procedures, involuntary admissions, and emergency evaluations. Id. at 471.

8

For present purposes law is used in the inclusive sense to mean not just legislated law (whether characterized as international, public, or private law) but

court rules and practice directions etc.

322 FAMILY COURT REVIEW