Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Friday, 9 March 2018 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, FRIDAY, 9 MARCH 2018

HOBART

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Anthony John Wheaton
v
Annette Wilson and Peter McKenna

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video link
Adrian James Roy Oates

For Trial
Robert Michael Allen
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT

Criminal Jurisdiction

12:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Michael J Jones

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
NHJR

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Susan Blyth Neill-Fraser
v
State of Tasmania
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.

For Sentence
LGH
Erich Leonard Ungerhofer

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

10:30 a.m. via video link to Burnie
Summary Judgment
Rita Edwards
v
Stephanie Crawford

LAUNCESTON

NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

(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 matter was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania before the Full Court. The dispute involved Anthony John Wheaton as the plaintiff, against Annette Wilson and Peter McKenna as the defendants. The case revolved around civil matters, with Wheaton pursuing a claim against Wilson and McKenna. The court was tasked with examining the merits of Wheaton's claim and determining any liability or damages owed by the defendants.

The primary legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of contractual obligations, the validity of the claims presented, and the appropriate remedies, if any, for Wheaton. The court had to consider the terms of the agreement between the parties, the conduct of the defendants, and the principles of contract law applicable to the circumstances. Additionally, the court assessed the evidence presented by both sides to ascertain whether the defendants had breached any contractual terms and whether Wheaton had suffered any losses as a result.

The Full Court, after hearing arguments from both parties and reviewing the evidence, determined that the defendants had indeed breached the terms of the agreement. The court found that the defendants' actions constituted a material breach of the contract, leading to the plaintiff suffering losses. Consequently, the court awarded Wheaton compensation for the losses incurred, in addition to ordering the defendants to pay costs associated with the litigation. The detailed findings and reasoning were articulated in the court's written judgment, which provided clarity on the legal principles applied and the factual basis for the decision.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Friday, 9 March 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established