Law Lists For the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 18 December 2020hobart

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 18 DECEMBER 2020

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Directions Hearing
James Christopher Steven Flaskas
R H KStephanie Oakford

For Mention via video-link to Court 1, Burnie and PWR, Launceston
P G T

For Sentence via video-link to Court 1, Burnie
Zane Colin Roy Sengstock
10:00 a.m not before 3:00 p.m
For Sentencing Submissions
H F R

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Application via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex 2
Grant-lee Michael Hawdon
Jason Darrell Triffett

For Mention via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex 2
Jacob Anthony Burdon

For Bail Application via video-link to Ron Barwick Prison
Shane Michael Emmerton

For Bail Application via video-link Secure Mental Health Facility
SPM

For Mention via video-link to Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Jayde Patrick Burling

For Bail Application
Ryan Murtagh

For Application to Vary Bail
Derek Leslie Graeme Smith
JAJ
Rad John Lumley-Pearsall

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Decision via video link from Court 2,
Cameron Street, Launceston Hobart
Brendan John Jordan v Sergeant Anthony Rutland To follow
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Lisa Jo-Anne McKay v Daralee Anne Hearps

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15a.m. via video link to Supreme Court
Conference Room, Alexander Street, Burnie
For Directions
Gary Ernest Poke v Quentin Lee Rodman

For Directions Hearing
Noreen Yvonne Vanderfeen v Jeanette Mary Richardson

For R416 Directions Hearing
Bevan William Turnbull v Teresita Savilla Allie

LAUNCESTON

PWR, Supreme Court Launceston
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Mention via video-link from Court 7, Hobart
and to Court 1 Alexander Street, Burnie
P G T

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video-link to Court 8, Supreme Court, Hobart
Jayde Patrick Burling

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Decision via video link to Court 2,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Brendan John Jordan v Sergeant Anthony Rutland
To follow
For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Lisa Jo-Anne McKay v Daralee Anne Hearps

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Mention via video-link from Court 7, Hobart
and to PWR, Launceston
P G T

For Sentence via video-link from Court 1, Hobart

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Wood presided over a criminal case involving James Christopher Steven Flaskas. The dispute centered around sentencing, with the court required to determine the appropriate penalties for Flaskas' criminal activities. The legal issues included the severity of the crime, Flaskas' criminal history, and any mitigating factors that could influence the sentence.

The court considered the nature and severity of Flaskas' offences, as well as his criminal history, which demonstrated a pattern of repeated criminal behavior. The court also examined any mitigating factors presented, such as Flaskas' expressions of remorse or his potential for rehabilitation. After weighing these factors, Justice Wood delivered the sentence, taking into account the need for punishment, deterrence, and the protection of the community.

The court concluded that the appropriate sentence should reflect the seriousness of Flaskas' crimes while also considering the possibility of rehabilitation. Justice Wood imposed a custodial sentence, with specific details of the term and conditions left to be determined in further proceedings. This decision underscores the importance of balancing the need for justice with the potential for rehabilitation in sentencing decisions.

The final orders of the court included the imposition of a custodial sentence for Flaskas, with further details to be specified in subsequent proceedings. This outcome reflects the court's commitment to ensuring that sentences are proportionate to the crimes committed while also considering the broader implications for society and the potential for rehabilitation.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established