Law Lists For the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 28 February 2020HOBARTCourt 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart Before Justice WOODCriminal Jurisdiction3:15 p.mFor Directions HearingR H K 3:30 p.mFor Bail ApplicationF N

Case [2020] TASSCCourtlist 90


To Follow:
For Sentence
Joshua Phillip Thompson

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
3:00p.m.
For Hearing via video link from
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart 
Richard William Johnston
v
Tasmania Police

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Preliminary Proceedings Application
JSB

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

Not Before 11:15 a.m.
For Mention
Tye John Baker

4:00 p.m.
For Plea
Jessie Emelia Robinson

4:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
RBR

For Bail Consent
Jarrad Christian Robaard

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 2020

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
3:15 p.m
For Directions Hearing
R H K

3:30 p.m
For Bail Application
F N

4:15 p.m
For Application
Janelle Kay Smith
Shannon John Boyer

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent
Kyle Richard Dupree

For Mention
Duc Van Ngyuen
Jack Bradley Harvey
Steven Craig Murtagh

For Bail Application
Michael Hopkinson

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Disputed Facts Hearing
Christopher Richard Stevenson

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:15a.m.
For Trial
DJB
(Part-heard)

9:30a.m.
For Application to Vary Bail
Matthew John Cameron

10:00a.m.
For Mention via Video Link
Stephen James Williams

For Directions Hearing
Glenn William Barnard
Neil Craig Berne

2:15p.m.
For Directions Hearing
BJHC

For Sentence
JMB
WAR

Not Before 2:45p.m.
For Bail Application
Rowan Leigh Hume

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
to Launceston Reception Prison
Heath Michael Kelp

For Directions Hearing
Michael Andrew Smith
Christine Joy Radford

For Plea
Meraki Sharka James Mansell  

For Bail Application
Daniel Reginald Clarke
JSS     

Not Before 1:00 p.m.
For Special Hearing
ED

Details
Case
[2020] TASSCCourtlist 90
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania handled a variety of cases on February 28, 2020, across multiple locations. In Hobart, Justice Wood presided over a criminal directions hearing and a bail application, while in Launceston, Justice Brett dealt with a civil hearing via video link and a disputed facts hearing in criminal matters. In Burnie, Chief Justice Blow managed preliminary proceedings applications, a trial, and a mention. Each case involved distinct legal issues pertinent to the individual circumstances of the defendants.

The court had to address several legal issues, including the procedural aspects of bail applications, the management of criminal trials, and the handling of disputed facts in criminal cases. In some instances, the court needed to consider the appropriate conditions for bail, while in others, it had to decide on the admissibility of certain evidence or the scheduling of trials. The court also had to address applications to vary bail and special hearings in the Burnie sessions.

Justice Wood, in the Hobart sessions, focused on ensuring the criminal proceedings adhered to the necessary legal protocols, while Justice Brett in Launceston had to balance the expeditious resolution of civil matters with the rights of the parties involved. Chief Justice Blow in Burnie had to manage the logistics of remote hearings and ensure that all parties had a fair opportunity to present their cases. The court's reasoning was guided by the principles of fairness, efficiency, and adherence to legal standards. Each case was handled with due regard to the rights of the accused and the need to ensure that the judicial process was transparent and just.

The final orders of the court varied depending on the nature of each case. In criminal matters, decisions were made on bail applications, setting trial dates, and addressing procedural applications. In civil matters, the court made orders regarding the admissibility of evidence and the scheduling of hearings. The outcomes reflected the court's commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice was served in a timely and fair manner.

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.