AMENDED LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 4 MAY 2021
HOBART
PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
From Court 1 Alexander Street, Burnie
2:15 p.m
For Bail Application via video-link
Justin James Browne
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
(Part-heard)
PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
SDH Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
KWDF
2:00pm
For Mention
Kylie Louise WiseCourt 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:15a.m.
For Bail Application
Aiden Michael James Spaulding
Joshua Robin Oakley
For Application to Vary Bail
Tyron James Page
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:30a.m.
For Directions Hearing Public Trustee v Heather Ann Webster as representative of the next of kin and ors
11:00a.m.
For Mention
Brehane Giday Girmay by his litigation guardian Tsege Gebregiorgis Behre v Jason Vivian Green
12:00p.m.
For Mention
Mures Fishing Pty Ltd (ACN 069 572 149) v Patrick Gerrard Holloway and anor
2:15p.m.
For R416 Directions Hearing The Uniting Church in Australia Property Trust (Tas) (ABN 88 774 033 774) v Attorney General for the State of Tasmania
For Directions Hearing
Matthew Hurst v Launceston City Council and ors
For Directions Hearing
Chamber Matter
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00
For Directions Hearing
Stewart Ashley Martin
For Trial
Jack-Harrison Vincent Sadler
4:15pm
Directions Hearing via video link to PWR,
Alexander Street, Burnie and
PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
SDH
BURNIE
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Mention and Bail Consent
Jayden Garry Fehlberg
For Sentencing Submissions
Shane Anthony Dyson
To follow
For Bail Application
Dane Ronald Pyke
2:15 p.m
For Bail Consent
Blair Darcy Kaine
For Bail Application via video-link
Justin James Browne
PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
SDH
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 131
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court heard a bail application on behalf of Justin James Browne, conducted via video-link from the Burnie Court. The application was heard by Justice Estcourt, sitting in the criminal jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Tasmania in Hobart. The legal issue before the court was whether Browne was eligible for bail, taking into account the seriousness of the offence, the likelihood of Browne appearing in court if released, and any other relevant factors.
Justice Estcourt considered the evidence and submissions presented by both the prosecution and the defence. The court noted that Browne had been charged with serious offences, including assault occasioning bodily harm, and had a history of non-compliance with bail conditions. The prosecution argued that Browne should remain in custody due to the risk of reoffending and the potential danger to the community. In response, the defence submitted that Browne had strong ties to the community, a stable employment history, and had expressed a willingness to comply with any bail conditions imposed. After weighing the relevant factors, Justice Estcourt determined that Browne was not eligible for bail and ordered that he remain in custody until his next court appearance.
The court's decision was based on the seriousness of the charges, Browne's history of non-compliance with bail conditions, and the risk of reoffending. Justice Estcourt concluded that the risk to the community outweighed any potential benefits of granting bail to Browne. As a result, the court denied the bail application and ordered that Browne remain in custody until his next court appearance.
Justice Estcourt considered the evidence and submissions presented by both the prosecution and the defence. The court noted that Browne had been charged with serious offences, including assault occasioning bodily harm, and had a history of non-compliance with bail conditions. The prosecution argued that Browne should remain in custody due to the risk of reoffending and the potential danger to the community. In response, the defence submitted that Browne had strong ties to the community, a stable employment history, and had expressed a willingness to comply with any bail conditions imposed. After weighing the relevant factors, Justice Estcourt determined that Browne was not eligible for bail and ordered that he remain in custody until his next court appearance.
The court's decision was based on the seriousness of the charges, Browne's history of non-compliance with bail conditions, and the risk of reoffending. Justice Estcourt concluded that the risk to the community outweighed any potential benefits of granting bail to Browne. As a result, the court denied the bail application and ordered that Browne remain in custody until his next court appearance.
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.