LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, MONDAY, 15 JANUARY 2018
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent
LHG
For Bail Application
Bradley John Kaye
(Part-Heard)
Darren Scott Freeman
Katherine Startup
Britt Nicole Johns
For Bail Application via Video-Link to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Caitlin McGee
For Bail Application via Video-Link to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
and Launceston Reception Prison
Daniel John Ewell
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
11:00 a.m.
For Application
Barbara Etter
v
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Bail Application via Video-Link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Caitlin McGee
Daniel John Ewell
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:
- AGLC
- Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Monday, 15 January 2018 [2018] TASSCCourtlist 306
- Case
- [2018] TASSCCourtlist 306
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court encompassed the standard criteria for bail, including the seriousness of the offence, the likelihood of the accused appearing in court, the risk of reoffending, and the potential impact on the community if bail were granted. The court had to evaluate these factors in light of the specific circumstances of each applicant. Furthermore, the applications presented issues regarding the procedural fairness of considering bail applications via video link, especially in ensuring the integrity and effectiveness of the judicial process.
Justice Geason assessed the evidence and arguments presented, applying the relevant legal principles and statutes. The court concluded that the applicants met the necessary criteria for bail, taking into account the evidence provided. Consequently, bail was granted to all applicants, subject to certain conditions to mitigate any potential risks to the community. This decision underscored the court's commitment to ensuring that bail decisions are made fairly and judiciously, considering both the rights of the accused and the broader public interest.
The final orders included specific conditions for the release of each applicant on bail, such as reporting requirements, residence restrictions, and curfews. These conditions were tailored to address the unique circumstances of each case, aiming to balance the rights of the individuals with the need to protect the community. The court's detailed orders reflected a thorough consideration of the evidence and legal arguments presented during the hearings.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.