Legal Research
Cases
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania for Tuesday, 1 August 2017

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania for Tuesday, 1 August 2017

Case [2017] TASSCCourtlist 175

Criminal Jurisdiction

Bail

Trial

Criminal Law

Civil Litigation & Procedure

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FOR TUESDAY, 1 AUGUST 2017

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Stuart Malcom Allen
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent

James Anthony Gordon
Ben Bryan Nichols

For Trial
DBL
(Part Heard)

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON
No list available at time of publication.

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial
MPB
(part-heard)

(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:

Details

AGLC: Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania for Tuesday, 1 August 2017 [2017] TASSCCourtlist 175
Case: [2017] TASSCCourtlist 175
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania, presided over by Justice Tennet, heard a case involving Stuart Malcom Allen, who faced criminal charges. The specifics of the charges and the nature of the dispute are not detailed in the provided excerpt. The court was tasked with deciding on the admissibility of certain evidence and potentially the guilt of the defendant. The legal issues before the court included whether the evidence obtained was lawful and if it could be used against the defendant.

In delivering the judgment, Justice Tennet considered the legal principles surrounding the admissibility of evidence and the rights of the accused under the law. The court examined whether there were any breaches of legal procedures that could invalidate the evidence. After thorough deliberation, Justice Tennet ruled that the evidence was admissible, and the trial proceeded based on this decision. The final outcome of the case, however, is not provided in the excerpt, leaving the determination of the defendant's guilt to be resolved in subsequent proceedings.

If the case involved any further appeals or additional hearings, these would need to be referenced in subsequent legal documents or court records. The excerpt does not provide details on any final orders made by the court, but it is clear that the proceedings were part of an ongoing criminal trial. The decision on the admissibility of evidence was a critical step in the case, setting the stage for the next phases of the trial.

Orders