Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 29 April 2016 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 29 APRIL 2016

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.

For Trial

Aaron Leonard Townsend

(Part-Heard)

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice Wood
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Motion to Review
RKF
v
Senior Constable Scott

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE

Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00am For Mention
Luke Anthony Shaw
Joshua Allan Kirkwood
Matthew Luke Williams
Joshua Paul Birtwhistle
Corey Mitchell Gesler
John Rettas
Malcolm Joshua Mayne
Thomas James Aliano
Stephanie Peta Fleming

To Follow
For Bail Consent
Tyson Lee Hannah
Dane Lindon Squires

To Follow
In Court as in Chambers
For Bail Application
Scott Bevan Lucas

To Follow
For Plea
Adam Jacob Shepherd
Steven Jeffrey Crawford
Erich Leonard Ungerhofer
Ricky Lee Smith-Towns
Paul Lance Broad

To Follow
For Application to Vary Order Suspending Sentence
Alexander James Bartels

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice Porter
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m.

For Trial (Part Heard)
Gavin Richard Baldwin

10:00 a.m.
For Mention

Nicholas Shane Burns-Peel

(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

The Supreme Court of Tasmania convened on 29 April 2016, with several cases scheduled for hearing in various locations. Among the cases was RKF v Senior Constable Scott, which was listed before Justice Wood in the Civil Jurisdiction. This case involved a motion to review a decision made by Senior Constable Scott, although the specifics of the dispute remain undisclosed in the provided excerpt. The legal issues central to this case likely revolved around the validity and scope of the police officer's decision and whether it adhered to relevant laws and procedures.

Justice Wood was tasked with examining the arguments presented by both parties to determine whether the motion to review should be granted. The court would have considered the legal principles applicable to police actions, including the extent of judicial oversight over such decisions. The outcome of the review would depend on whether the court found any procedural errors or legal misapplications in the decision-making process of Senior Constable Scott. The reasoning and the final decision would hinge on a careful analysis of the evidence and the arguments presented, ensuring that the principles of fairness and legality were upheld.

In conclusion, the court's decision in RKF v Senior Constable Scott would have provided clarity on the extent of judicial review over police decisions and would set a precedent for similar cases in the future. The final orders would reflect the court's determination on whether the motion to review was successful, which could result in either affirming the original decision or directing the police officer to take further action or reconsider their decision.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 29 April 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established