Amended Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Wednesday, 21 March 2018

AMENDED LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, WEDNESDAY, 21 MARCH 2018

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Steven Craig Murtagh

For Trial
Matthew John Davey
Dillon Anthony Davey
Scott Raymond Dale
(Part Heard)

4:00 p.m.
For Mention via video link to
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
SM
v
State of Tasmania

For Application for Forfeiture
Stephanie Anne Maree Duggan

For Bail Application
Simon Anthony Catto

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
DFP
(Part-Heard)

For Mention
Scott Andrew Cripps

For Directions Hearing
Stephen John Williams

For Bail Consent
Stephanie Louise Hay

For Trial

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice SLICER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Application
Brendan Lee Jones
Mark Frankcombe
Mark Burridge
Alex Large
Samuel Kenneth Joe Morley
Bradley Abel
James MP Fitzgerald

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Brocklands Pty Ltd
v
Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd
(Part-Heard)

Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions

Travis Anthony Mortyn

Tyron James Page

LAUNCESTON

Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction

4:00pm For Mention via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
SM v State of Tasmania

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial (Part Heard)
Nathan Scott Davidson

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Mention

Nathan Gregory Coppleman
Melinda Lee Batten
Todd Michael Walker
Joshua Michael Wyllie

For Trial
Guy Jon Lorenz
Scott Phillip Strahan
(Part-Heard)

4:00 p.m.
For Mention by video link
Bradley John Upton

For Mention
Vanessa Rae Hardwick
Joshua Adrian Leary

For Plea
Lochlan John Jahnig

(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:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case involves multiple matters heard across various courts in Tasmania. In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, several criminal trials and mentions were scheduled, along with some civil proceedings. The matters included trials and bail applications for individuals with initials ranging from A to Z, indicating a broad range of cases. Additionally, there were applications for forfeiture, bail, and directions hearings. In Magistrates Court, further criminal proceedings were listed.

The legal issues before the court encompassed a wide array of criminal law matters, including the consideration of bail applications, directions for ongoing trials, and sentencing submissions. The civil case involved a dispute between Brocklands Pty Ltd and Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd. Each case required the court to apply relevant statutory and common law principles to determine the appropriate legal outcomes.

The court's reasoning and outcomes were tailored to each specific case. For the criminal matters, the court considered factors such as the severity of the alleged offence, the likelihood of the accused appearing in court, and the potential risk to the community. In the civil case, the court evaluated the evidence presented and the applicable legal standards to make a determination. The bail applications were assessed based on the principles of bail law, with consideration given to the accused's likelihood of appearing in court and any risk they posed to the community.

The final orders made by the court would have varied based on the outcomes of each case. For the criminal matters, these could have included granting or denying bail, setting trial dates, or making sentencing decisions. In the civil case, the court would have made a determination on the merits of the dispute between the two companies.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established