Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 4 November 2016

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 4 NOVEMBER 2016

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Sentence

Rodney Matthew Klye
Jodie Diane Earley

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Sentence
Darren Scott Freeman

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Susan Burge
v
Commonwealth Bank of Australia

LAUNCESTON
No list for Launceston.

BURNIE

No list for Burnie.

(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

Rodney Matthew Klye and Jodie Diane Earley appeared before Justice Wood for sentencing, while Darren Scott Freeman was also before Justice Brett for the same purpose. Both cases pertain to criminal matters, with the specific charges and details not detailed in the document. Meanwhile, Susan Burge's case against the Commonwealth Bank of Australia was listed for hearing before Chief Justice Blow. The case involves a civil matter, with the specifics again not outlined in the document.

The legal issues before the court involved determining appropriate sentences for Klye and Earley, as well as Freeman, each charged with separate criminal offences. The court was tasked with considering the circumstances of each case, the nature of the offences, and any mitigating or aggravating factors before delivering its judgments. For Burge's case, the court needed to evaluate the claims made by Burge against the Commonwealth Bank of Australia and make a determination based on the evidence and arguments presented.

Justice Wood, in the cases of Klye and Earley, and Justice Brett, in the case of Freeman, both considered the respective charges, the individual circumstances of each offender, and any relevant legal precedents. The sentences handed down reflected a careful consideration of the facts and applicable laws. For the case involving Burge and the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Chief Justice Blow reviewed the evidence and submissions from both parties, providing a judgment based on the merits of the case.

The final orders of the court were not detailed in the document, but they would have included the sentencing for Klye, Earley, and Freeman, as well as a ruling in the case of Burge versus the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established