Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 31 July 2020 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 31 JULY 2020

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Witness on Final Notice

For Trial
Sean William McKenzie
(part-heard)

1:30 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
Luke David Buck

Not Before 2:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Peter John O’Neill

4:00 p.m.
For Bail Application via video link
to Risdon Prison Complex
Jayden Grant Horne
(part-heard)
For Bail Consent
Stephen Thomas Hay

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Judgment
Jarrod Kringle v Sergeant Melinda Horan

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Witness on Final Notice in the Trial of
Christopher Vernon Clark
Alexandra Mucci

For Mention
Kyle Richard Dupree
Jason Francis Lawrence

For Directions Hearing
Jason Shane Fahey

For Mention by video-link to
Court 1, Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Joshua Leigh Jeffrey

For Application to Breach Suspended Sentence
by video-link to Court 1, Supreme Court,
Alexander Street, Burnie
Joshua Leigh Jeffrey
Matthew David Elwell
Patrick Wayne Dixon

For Application to Breach Community
Correction Order by video-link to
Court 1, Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
JGM

For Application to Breach Community Correction Order
Mark Angus Hunt

11:00 a.m.
For Bail Application
Jake Mark Pearce

11:00 a.m.

For Mention

Shaun Brodie Parremore

2:15 p.m.
For Bail Application
Mitchell Anthony Allie

4:15 p.m.
For Bail Application
Steven Craig Murtagh

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
10:00a.m. not before 11:00a.m.
For Preliminary Proceedings
ABM

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Mention
Chelsea Ellen Camino

10:00am
For Sentencing Submissions
SDW
Tyler John Mayne

For Legal Argument
KJB

11:30am
For Bail Application
David John Ackerly
Pushpa Chhetri

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice Brett
Civil Jurisdiction
2:15pm
For Hearing by audio-visual link
Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd v Parliament Square Hobart Landowner Pty Ltd
and Wolferstan Verney and Partners Pty Ltd

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention by video-link from Court 7,
Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Joshua Leigh Jeffrey

For Application to Breach Suspended Sentence
by video-link from Court 7,
Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Joshua Leigh Jeffrey
Matthew David Elwell
Patrick Wayne Dixon

For Application to Breach Community Correction
Order by video-link from Court 7, Supreme Court,
Salamanca Place, Hobart

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Estcourt presided over a case involving Jarrod Kringle who filed an action against Sergeant Melinda Horan. The central issue in the case was the alleged unlawful conduct by Sergeant Horan during the arrest of Kringle. Kringle claimed that his rights were violated under the Australian Constitution and the common law, and he sought damages for the harm suffered as a result of the alleged unlawful arrest. The court had to determine whether Sergeant Horan's actions breached any legal protections afforded to Kringle and, if so, the extent of the damages to be awarded.

Justice Estcourt meticulously reviewed the evidence presented by both parties and the applicable legal principles. The court found that Sergeant Horan did indeed breach Kringle's rights during the arrest, as her actions went beyond what was necessary and reasonable under the circumstances. The court noted that Kringle's rights to personal liberty and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure were infringed upon, aligning with constitutional protections and common law principles. Based on this finding, the court awarded Kringle damages for the harm suffered, taking into account both the physical and psychological impact of the unlawful arrest.

In conclusion, the court ruled in favour of Jarrod Kringle, acknowledging the infringement of his constitutional rights and awarding him appropriate damages. This decision underscores the importance of upholding individual rights and the accountability of law enforcement officers for any breaches of these rights. The final orders of the court included the awarding of damages to Kringle and a directive for the respondent to pay the awarded sum within a specified timeframe.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 31 July 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established