The ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions last month launched a bid to delay hearings for nearly 30 cases as they argued simultaneous intensive listing periods in both courts meant it didn't have enough prosecutors to run the matters.

Director Jon White, SC, said it had been "an issue of scheduling as much as resources" that could be avoided if the lower court stopped block listing hearings during Supreme Court trial blitzes - a move Canberra's top magistrate said would not be feasible and could cause delays.

Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker knocked back applications to adjourn about 27 cases set to be heard in the past two weeks as she was not satisfied a resource shortage was a valid reason the cases should be delayed.

She told the court she hoped the listing hearing, during which some matters resolved, would free up some time and resources and suggested the DPP and court instead look at some "practical ways" to manage the problem.

However, her response prompted Mr White to write to defence lawyers in affected cases to advise the DPP's position was "unaltered" and it would "not be in a position" to prosecute their matter.

"Accordingly, no witnesses have been subpoenaed, nor will there be a prosecutor allocated to appear on the day for this matter," the letter said.

Those cases were among more than a dozen matters mentioned before Ms Walker in two recent special fixtures lists, where matters are block listed and generally either resolved with guilty pleas or allocated for hearing.

Ms Walker knocked back the prosecution's fresh requests for an adjournment in several cases.

In about four matters, prosecutors said they had no witnesses to call, prompting Ms Walker to note the DPP had no evidence to offer before she dismissed the charges.

They included about seven traffic offences, a drug driving charge and a protection order breach.

Mr White said in a statement he was a strong advocate of intensive listing periods in both courts as they had "dramatically reduced listing delays in recent times".

"I have repeatedly identified that it is not possible for the DPP to simultaneously provide prosecutors for both intensive lists, on top of the other demands on the office.

"The problem here was despite this, the Magistrates Court listed a special fixture period that corresponded with a six week intensive Supreme Court listing period."

Ms Walker said while "efforts had been made not to overlap when possible" it was not feasible to avoid simultaneous intensive listing periods given the number of weeks the Supreme Court now block-listed matters throughout the year.

She said the block lists had helped ease delays in the lower court and without them many matters would be "significantly more delayed" in coming to hearing.

Mr White, who previously indicated his office would prioritise Supreme Court cases if listing periods clashed, said the solution was "a simple one".

"The Supreme Court listing periods are known well in advance, and the Magistrates Court is able to list matters to avoid those periods.

"We will continue to work with the Magistrates Court to achieve a sensible and co-ordinated approach to listing matters, so that these problems can be avoided in the future."

Supreme Court trials are intensively listed during a six week period - known in the legal profession as the "blitzes" - every few months under reforms introduced several years ago designed to clear its extensive backlog of cases.

Concerns that backlog was shifting to the lower court prompted it to stop a policy of scheduling hearings outside of blitz periods in the higher court after Ms Walker said the arrangement was "unsustainable".