Amended Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday 12 November 2014

AMENDED SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY 12 NOVEMBER 2014

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the Court of Criminal Appeal
10:00a.m.
For Hearing
William Eric Yabsley
v
The Queen

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
2:15 p.m.
For Hearing
Daniel Sean Pennicott
v
State of Tasmania

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Bail Consent
Matthew Brian Williams

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00p.m.
For Sentence
Joseph Andrew Edwards
Jess Aaron Morgan

In Court as in Chambers
4:00pm
For Application to Vary Bail
Damien Ashley Thomas

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice WOOD

Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
The Minister Administering the State Service Act
V
The Full Bench of the Tasmanian Industrial Commission
(Part-Heard)

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice HARPER

Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Timothy James Ellis
v
Kelly Cordwell
(Part-Heard)

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
Determination of Preliminary Issue
Macquarie Builders Pty Ltd
v
HR Group Pty Ltd

2:15 p.m.
Chamber Matter

4:00 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
T&M Enterprises Pty Ltd
v
Australia Associated Motor Insurers Limited

4:15 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
Forest Enterprises Australia Limited
v
Cohen

4:30 p.m.
Directions Hearing
Forest Enterprises Australia Limited
v
Hardwick
______________________________________________________
(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Email subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The document presents the amended law lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania for Wednesday 12 November 2014. The listed matters encompass a variety of criminal and civil cases, indicating the breadth of judicial work undertaken by the Supreme Court of Tasmania on that day. Notable among the listed cases is William Eric Yabsley v The Queen, which is scheduled for hearing in Court 7 at 10:00 a.m. before the Court of Criminal Appeal. This case likely involves a significant criminal appeal, given the involvement of the Court of Criminal Appeal. Another significant matter is Daniel Sean Pennicott v State of Tasmania, which is scheduled for hearing at 2:15 p.m. before the same court. This case may involve a substantial dispute between the individual and the state.

The legal issues the court was required to decide on this day would have varied across the listed cases. In criminal cases such as William Eric Yabsley v The Queen and Daniel Sean Pennicott v State of Tasmania, the court would have had to address matters related to the interpretation and application of criminal law, the admissibility of evidence, and the appropriate sentencing or appeal outcomes. In civil matters, such as The Minister Administering the State Service Act v The Full Bench of the Tasmanian Industrial Commission and Timothy James Ellis v Kelly Cordwell, the court would have focused on resolving disputes involving statutory interpretation, contractual obligations, or personal injury claims. The court's role in these matters would have been to ensure that the legal principles were correctly applied and that justice was fairly administered.

The court's reasoning and outcome in each case would have been detailed in the respective judgments or orders delivered on that day. For criminal appeals, the court would have reviewed the lower court's decisions to ensure they were legally sound and just. In civil matters, the court would have considered the evidence and arguments presented to determine the rights and obligations of the parties involved. The final orders would have been issued accordingly, resolving the legal disputes before the court. The outcomes would have reflected the court's interpretation of the law and the facts of each case, providing legal clarity and resolution to the parties involved.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established