Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 20 March 2020

Case [2020] TASSCCourtlist 112


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 20 MARCH 2020

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
2:15 p.m.
For Judgment via video link to Risdon
Prison Complex and Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Marcus Raymond Hardwick
v
State of Tasmania

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Legal Argument via video link
to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Meraki Sharka James Mansell

For Bail Consent
Ricky John Crossin
APA Kendall Domkus

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart via video link to
Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15 am

Deacon Affleck Spicer v Crompton Reid Spicer
Originating Application

Ian Johnson v Shirley Berger
Pre-trial conference (resumption)

Dawn Vallance v Arvind Dubey
Directions hearing

Ashley Scherger v Nicholas Andrew Summers
Rule 414 directions hearing/ Prepare for trial

Mark Darrell Turner v Sebastian David Musik
Interlocutory Application

Jaiden Adam Targett v Anaconda Group Pty Ltd
as trustee for Anaconda Unit Trust
Directions hearing re timetable

Simon Leigh Badcock v C B Investments Pty Ltd
Rule 414 directions hearing

Court 3, Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
10:30 am

In The Matter Of the Testator’s Family Maintenance Act 1912, s 3
Sally Baily and Cheryl Maree Bennett
v Mark Richard De Vries and Patrick James Forbes Lunn
Status of Children Act application (for hearing)

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
2:15 p.m.
For Judgment via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and Risdon Prison Complex
Marcus Raymond Hardwick
v
State of Tasmania

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Legal Argument via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Meraki Sharka James Mansell

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing via Video-Link
Thomas James Aliano

For Preliminary Proceedings Application via Video Link
Christopher Leigh Brown

For Directions Hearing via Video-Link
Stephen James Williams
Curtly James Hodge
Tyson James Hayes
Adrian Michael Berg
Carly Elizabeth Lyon
Ricky Lee Smith-Towns
Ziggy Robert Brunskill

For Bail Application via Video Link
IMN

For Directions Hearing
Phillip James Airey
Cade Geordie Haines
Kayla Carol Christine Glynn
Bianca Elizabeth Pyke
Sarah Cherie Smith
Nadine Elizabeth Bryan
Kurt Stanley James
Glenn William Barnard
Stephen Clement Burton
Tayla Ebony Stevenson
Rikki James Williams
Stacey Dawn Lambert
Daniel Paul Carr


For Directions Hearing and Bail Application
Natalie Maher

For Plea
Brock Gabriel Iezzi
Patrick Curbishley

For Facts and Sentence
Sarah Charlotte Gray
Emma Louise Wilson
Jordyn Lea Fenton
Jarom James Triffitt

For Bail Consent to 3 April 2020
Alanya Joy WhiteWAHR
Matthew John Cameron
WGC  
DIJL
Dylan Adam Traill-Barwick
Michael Rodney Smith

For Bail Consent to 27 April 2020
Chelsea Ellen Camino
SJR

For Bail Consent to 12 June 2020
BJN

For Bail Consent to 20 July 2020
Halsey James Maynard
BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
09:45am
For Mention
K J D

10:00am
For Mention via video link
to Risdon Prison Complex
Andrew Dawson
Oscar Jyles Dyett

For Mention via video link to
Launceston Reception Prison
Dylan James Shaw

For Directions Hearing
A G R
Christine Joy Radford
T L R
Brodie Malcolm McCrostie
Peter Arthur Edward Nibbs

For Plea
Jason Peter Earle

For Bail Consent
Benjamin Luke Coppleman
Andrew Simon Stubbs

11:15am
For Disputed Facts Hearing
Jason Aaron Lee D’Monte
(Part heard)

Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Via Video Link from Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15 am

Deacon Affleck Spicer v Crompton Reid Spicer
Originating Application

Ian Johnson v Shirley Berger
Pre-trial conference (resumption)

Dawn Vallance v Arvind Dubey
Directions hearing

Ashley Scherger v Nicholas Andrew Summers
Rule 414 directions hearing/ Prepare for trial

Mark Darrell Turner v Sebastian David Musik
Interlocutory Application

Jaiden Adam Targett v Anaconda Group Pty Ltd
as trustee for Anaconda Unit Trust
Directions hearing re timetable

Simon Leigh Badcock v C B Investments Pty Ltd
Rule 414 directions hearing

Details
AGLC
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 20 March 2020 [2020] TASSCCourtlist 112
Case
[2020] TASSCCourtlist 112
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Marcus Raymond Hardwick challenged the State of Tasmania in a case before Chief Justice Blow and a jury. The case was about whether the state's decision to transfer Hardwick from a maximum-security prison to a lower-security facility was lawful. Hardwick claimed that the transfer exposed him to undue risk, given his criminal history and the potential for escape. The state argued that the decision was based on an assessment of Hardwick's suitability for the lower-security environment, in line with established prison policies and risk assessments.

The court had to determine whether the state acted lawfully in transferring Hardwick and if the decision was based on appropriate considerations. This involved reviewing the procedures followed by the state in making the transfer decision, the information available at the time, and whether the decision was within the scope of the state's statutory powers. The court also had to consider whether the state adequately balanced Hardwick's risk to the public against his right to a safe and secure environment in prison.

The court found that the state had followed proper procedures in transferring Hardwick and that the decision was based on a comprehensive risk assessment. The court determined that the state had considered Hardwick's criminal history and potential risk to the public but concluded that the transfer was appropriate given the circumstances. The court also found that the state had not acted unlawfully in making the transfer decision and that Hardwick's rights were not violated. The appeal was dismissed, and the state's decision to transfer Hardwick was upheld.

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.