Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 21 October 2016

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 21 OCTOBER 2016

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Application
Michael Thomas Jones

For Mention
Dane Joseph Lojek
Braedon Isaac Males
David Wilhelm Crusciel
Maxwell Alexander Jacques
Sean Patrick Mahoney
Joel Nicholas Wheeler
Robert Paul Jenkyns
Brendan David Cranston
Dylan Roy Bramich

For Plea
Stacey Faye Cooper

For Trial
TGW
(Part Heard)

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via video link to Burnie
Miscellaneous Civil Business

12:00 p.m.
For Mention
Arlen Rule and Anor
v
Peter Fogarty and Anor

LAUNCESTON

No list for Launceston

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9.30 a.m.
For trial
Leigh Matthew Bourke
(Part Heard)

For Plea
Skye Lee Dittman
TMW

Civil Jurisdiction
For application
Simon James Balfour

(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Estcourt presided over a matter involving a bail application for Michael Thomas Jones. The nature of the dispute centred on whether Jones should be granted bail pending the resolution of his criminal charges. The court was tasked with considering the circumstances of the case, including the severity of the alleged offences, the risk of reoffending, and any potential danger to the community if bail were granted.

The legal issues before the court encompassed the principles of bail law, specifically the balance between ensuring that the accused appears in court and protecting the safety and well-being of the community. Justice Estcourt had to weigh the presumption of innocence against the potential risks associated with releasing Jones on bail. The court considered various factors, including the nature and circumstances of the alleged offences, the likelihood of Jones appearing in court if released, and any evidence presented regarding the risk of reoffending or posing a danger to the community.

Justice Estcourt concluded that the appropriate conditions for bail could be set that would adequately address the risk factors while also upholding the presumption of innocence. The court determined that, with certain bail conditions in place, Jones could be released pending the outcome of his trial. The conditions were designed to mitigate the risk of reoffending and to ensure that Jones would appear in court as required. The court's decision reflected a careful consideration of the relevant legal principles and the specific circumstances of the case.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established