LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 19 MARCH 2019
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Bradley Scott Purkiss
Margaret Anne Otto
(Part-Heard)
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
3:30 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
JSR
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Jason Darrall Triffett
Dylan Jay Strickland
For Trial
Arlene Maree Taylor
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Damien Charles Knowles
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
IBF
DJV
Mark Raymond Roland
Nathan Gregory Coppleman
Jessie Emilia Robinson
For Trial
DPH
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video link to
Court 8, 5 Salamanca Place Hobart
TBE
(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)
MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:
subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:
- AGLC
- Amended Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 19 March 2019 [2019] TASSCCourtlist 52
- Case
- [2019] TASSCCourtlist 52
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues that the court was required to decide include the outcomes of ongoing and part-heard trials, the direction of pending criminal cases, and the scheduling and management of various criminal mentions. The court also needed to address any procedural issues that arose during the hearings and ensure that the cases were progressing appropriately. For civil matters, the court had to manage miscellaneous business, which could include a variety of legal disputes. The court's role was to oversee the hearings, provide directions where necessary, and ensure that the legal processes were followed correctly.
The court's reasoning and outcome were not detailed in the document, but the scheduling and organisation of the hearings reflect the court's efforts to manage its caseload efficiently. The court aimed to provide a structured and timely process for resolving the disputes and managing the legal matters brought before it. Each hearing was allocated to a specific court and judge, ensuring that the appropriate legal expertise was applied to each case. The scheduling of trials, mentions, and directions indicates a systematic approach to the administration of justice, aiming to address each matter in a timely and organised manner. The final orders of the court would depend on the outcomes of the hearings, which were not specified in the document.
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.