Few District Court cases finish on the day they begin. The Act gives the Court wide powers to adjourn, but it ties every adjournment to a decision about where the defendant will be in the meantime.
Indictable matters: 15 days at a time
Where a person is charged before a Court with an indictable offence, and, from the absence of witnesses or from any other reasonable cause, it becomes necessary or advisable to defer the hearing, the Court may adjourn the hearing from time to time, for such period not exceeding 15 days at any one time, as the Court considers reasonable, and may (a) by warrant remand the defendant to a corrective institution, police lock-up or other place of security; or (b) subject to this Act, order the discharge of the defendant on bail on his entering into a recognizance.
The 15-day cap is a protection against indefinite detention during a committal. It does not cap the total; a committal can be adjourned many times, each for up to 15 days. Section 76 allows a remand of up to seven days to be ordered verbally, and section 77 lets the Court order a remanded defendant to be brought up early. Section 78 requires a remand to be to an institution or lock-up in the Court’s area, or such other safe custody as it thinks fit.
Summary matters
(1) Where, before or during the hearing of an information other than one for an indictable offence, or of a complaint, it appears to the Court advisable, the Court may adjourn the hearing to a time and place to be then appointed or indefinitely.
(2) In the case of an information, the Court, during the adjournment, may (a) suffer the defendant to go at large; or (b) commit him to a corrective institution, police lock-up or other place of security; or (c) discharge him on bail on a recognizance for a reasonable amount, with or without sureties.
“Go at large” means released without conditions, which is the normal course for a defendant on summons. Custody during an adjournment of a summary charge is unusual and should be justified by the section 9 grounds. Section 88 separately allows cases not reached at a sitting to be adjourned to the next court day.
Bail must be considered on every adjournment
Subject to Section 4, where a person is in custody in connexion with any proceedings, including proceedings for committal, the court shall, on each occasion that it adjourns the proceedings before conviction, consider and accordingly grant or refuse bail to that person in accordance with Section 9.
The Magistrates’ Manual lists this as one of the occasions on which a magistrate must exercise the bail jurisdiction whether or not an application is made. Section 16 of the Bail Act requires written reasons for a refusal. Section 82 of the District Courts Act allows a recognizance to be conditioned for appearance at every adjourned hearing, so a defendant on “continuous bail” does not need a new recognizance each time. See how bail is decided.
Reasons to adjourn
| Ground | Provision |
|---|---|
| Defendant needs time to get a lawyer or prepare | Constitution s 37(4)(c); s 89 |
| Defendant misled by a variance in the charge | s 33: adjournment is mandatory on request |
| Particulars ordered | s 31 |
| Witness absent | ss 75, 89; a warrant may issue under s 68 |
| Witness refuses to be sworn or answer | s 70: up to eight days, with the witness in custody |
| No competent magistrate present | s 92: postponement by any magistrate or the Clerk |
| Mediation likely to settle a civil matter | s 22B(2) |
| Pre-sentence report | s 89, after conviction and before sentence; bail under Bail Act s 10 |
Section 260(1)(e) lets the Court order the party responsible for an adjournment to pay the costs it occasions. The Manual warns magistrates against adjourning generally, without a fixed date, except for good reason.
If the magistrate changes
If at the adjourned hearing the Court includes a Magistrate before whom the hearing did not take place, that Magistrate shall withdraw, or the Magistrate present may proceed with the hearing as if it had not been commenced; if the Court does not include any such Magistrate, it may proceed with the further hearing.
A part-heard summary case cannot be finished by a different magistrate on the earlier evidence. Either the original magistrate resumes, or the case starts again. Section 22C adds a specific bar: a magistrate who has tried and failed to mediate a civil matter may not hear it except at the parties’ request.
Witnesses at the adjourned hearing
Section 91 provides that everyone summoned in a case that is adjourned must attend the adjourned hearing without a further summons, and is entitled to additional expenses. A defendant who wants a witness at the resumed hearing need not serve again, but should remind the witness of the date.
Delay
Constitution section 37(3) entitles a person charged to a fair hearing within a reasonable time. Repeated adjournments at the prosecution’s request, with the defendant in custody, engage that right. The defendant’s remedies are an application for bail, a request that the Court refuse any further adjournment and dismiss under section 124 if the prosecution is not ready, and, in an extreme case, an application to the National Court. The Act contains no fixed rule of dismissal for delay, and a magistrate has no power to dismiss for want of prosecution outside the sections that provide for dismissal, as Malipu v Laka (2025) N11322 illustrates in the civil context.
The District Courts Act is not on PacLII; it is available on vLex.
Before relying on anything here, read the current text of the District Courts Act (Chapter 40) and check for later amendments. The Act is not on PacLII; the figures and time limits quoted in this series come from the consolidation to No 8 of 2000, and the District Courts (Amendment) Act 2009 changes some of them once it is brought into operation. If a decision matters to you, get advice — start with the Office of the Public Solicitor, or find a firm in the law firms directory.