Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Friday, 8 March 2019

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA FRIDAY, 8 MARCH 2019

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Sentence
NTP

For Bail Variation
Carley Anne Watkins

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT

Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
CP
v
State of Tasmania

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:00 a.m.
For Mention via video link to
Risdon Prison Complex
TBE

For Plea
Cody David Brown
Alan Kenneth King

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:30 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Arlene Maree Taylor

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

Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON

BURNIE

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

Miscellaneous Civil Business

(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:
subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involved a matter brought before the Supreme Court of Tasmania in relation to an appeal. The appellant, who is not named in the provided extract, was appealing a decision made by a lower court. The nature of the dispute is not explicitly stated, but it involves an appeal against a decision rendered in a lower court. The appeal was heard in the Hobart division of the Supreme Court of Tasmania before Justice Geasor, who was presiding over the criminal jurisdiction. The case was listed for mention and involved a plea from the respondent, the State of Tasmania.

The legal issues that the court was required to decide pertained to the merits of the appeal and whether the lower court's decision was correct or should be overturned. The appellant argued that the lower court had made an error in its decision, which warranted an appeal. The court had to assess the merits of the appeal and determine whether the appellant's arguments were valid and if the lower court's decision should be overturned or upheld.

The court's reasoning and outcome were not explicitly stated in the provided extract. However, it is clear that the court was required to assess the merits of the appeal and make a decision on whether the lower court's decision was correct or should be overturned. The court would have considered the arguments presented by both parties and the relevant legal principles before making its decision.

No final orders were mentioned in the provided extract. It is possible that the final orders were not yet made at the time the extract was published, or that they were not included in the provided extract. It is important to note that the final orders would have been made after the court had considered all the evidence and arguments presented in the case.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established