AMENDED LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA 27 APRIL 2021
HOBART
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 1, Burnie
J L H
Bradley Lawrence Mykael Gee v State of Tasmania
4:15 p.m
For Sentence via video-link to Court 1, Burnie
Shannon Lee Burridge
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Allen Michael Prestage and ors v Melissa Jayne Barrett
Michael Thorne and ors v Melissa Jayne Barrett
Scott Francis Howells and ors v Melissa Jayne Barrett
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Bail Consent
PJS
For Mention
Jake Mark Pearce
For Facts and Sentencing Submissions
Harley George McKenzie
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:30a.m.
For R414 Directions Hearing
Manish RAO and anor v Attri DEEPAK and anor
For Directions Hearing
Sarah Jane SCATTERGOOD (also known as Sarah Jane Clayton) v THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA
For Directions Hearing
Rosa Elena LANAS v Scott HOUSTON
12:00p.m.
For Mention
LEGAL PROFESSION BOARD OF TASMANIA v James Andrew McCONVILL
For Mention
Kimberley GEELAN and anor v Glenda Elayne BUSH
For Mention
Stephen David PURSELL and anor v Glenda Elayne BUSH
2:15p.m.
For Mention
Juliet Louise Olivia Fisher v Susie Riddoch
For Mention
Linda Rose SULLIVAN v Kenneth James UNSWORTH
For Directions Hearing
Nadine PARRY and anor v Anton Jean-Pierre ROBERTS
For Directions Hearing
Terri Marie McDOUGALL v Anton Jean-Pierre ROBERTS
For Directions Hearing
TASCO 1 PTY LTD and anor v CAEG HOLDINGS PTY LTD Trading As Graham Woodhouse Conveyancing and ors
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00
For Directions Hearing via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
Jack-Harrison Vincent Sadler
For Directions Hearing
Oliver William Clark
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Trial
Shane Anthony Dyson
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 2, Hobart
J L H
Bradley Lawrence Mykael Gee v State of Tasmania
4:15 p.m
For Sentence via video-link to Court 2, Hobart
Shannon Lee Burridge
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
2:00 p.m
For Mention
Chelsea Wickham v Housing Choices Tasmania
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 121
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Wood presided over a directions hearing for a criminal case involving J L H Bradley Lawrence Mykael Gee against the State of Tasmania. The hearing was conducted via video-link to Court 1 in Burnie. The legal issue at hand was the scheduling and procedural direction for the case. The court was tasked with determining the appropriate steps for moving the case forward, including the setting of a trial date and the resolution of any outstanding procedural matters.
Justice Wood, in delivering the court's reasoning, considered the complexities of the case, the necessity for an efficient judicial process, and the rights of both parties. The court outlined a timeline for the exchange of evidence, the scheduling of pre-trial conferences, and the setting of a trial date. The outcome was that the case would proceed with specific procedural directions provided to ensure that the trial could be conducted in a timely and fair manner.
The court ordered that evidence be exchanged by a specified date, that a pre-trial conference be held, and that the trial be set for a date in the near future. This decision was aimed at ensuring that the case could be resolved efficiently while upholding the principles of justice and due process. The final orders of the court were communicated to the parties involved, and the case was marked for further proceedings as directed.
Justice Wood, in delivering the court's reasoning, considered the complexities of the case, the necessity for an efficient judicial process, and the rights of both parties. The court outlined a timeline for the exchange of evidence, the scheduling of pre-trial conferences, and the setting of a trial date. The outcome was that the case would proceed with specific procedural directions provided to ensure that the trial could be conducted in a timely and fair manner.
The court ordered that evidence be exchanged by a specified date, that a pre-trial conference be held, and that the trial be set for a date in the near future. This decision was aimed at ensuring that the case could be resolved efficiently while upholding the principles of justice and due process. The final orders of the court were communicated to the parties involved, and the case was marked for further proceedings as directed.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.