Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Monday, 17 August 2020

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY, 17 AUGUST 2020

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Dean Phillip Braslin
4:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Luke David Buck
(part-heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m
For Directions Hearing
David Shaw v State of Tasmania
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00 a.m.
For Mention
JohnnyDavid Jones
Christopher James Brown

For Legal Argument
AHJH
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link
to Risdon Prison Complex
Ty Ferguson
Tyler Anthony James Causon
Benjamin John Howlett
Grant-Lee Michael Hawdon
Blaise Christopher Baddeley
Adrian Harris
Joshua Blair Read

For Directions Hearing via video-link
to Hobart Reception Prison
Jarod Lee Kringle
Kye John Edward Charles Louney

For Directions Hearing via video-link
to Mary Hutchinson Women’s Prison
Tara Mary Elizabeth Irwin

For Directions Hearing via video-link
to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Patrick Simon Bailey

For Directions Hearing
Nicholas John Barrett
Scott Steven Saxelby
Bradley Kenneth Brown
Craig Anthony Devine
Craig John Smith
Damian Steven Matthews
Gary Matthews
Jack Willem Harris
Colin Arthur Mitchell
Geoffrey Lynne Lucas
Adrian Alwyn Pickett
Rodney Jeffrey Bailey
Kenneth John Bailey

For Application
Christopher John Howard

For Bail Consent
Daniel Robert Knowles
Paul Luke Mason
Geoffrey Paul Bennett-Scrimshaw
Brian Graham Dean Gordon
Dallas John Eaves
Scott Alfred Robertson
Lachlan Justin Plummer
Justin Paul Moore
Thomas Ezekiel Ricketts
Carl Alexander Haas
RHK
JKH
Jacob William Cleary
David Andrew Thomas
Georgia Skrepetos
Ricky John Crossin
Amanda Louise White
PJS
Jason David Vasey
APA
Daniel John Ernest Dadson
MLVT
BTH
PT
Marcus Alexander Clayton
Gregory John Hall
Dylan John Kemp
Corey Paul Murphy
Kathleen Marie Arnold
Banjo Manser

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Edward Harvey Gee v The University of Tasmania Foundation

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link from
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Patrick Simon Bailey

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard various matters on Monday, 17 August 2020, ranging from trials to directions hearings. Among the cases listed, Dean Phillip Braslin faced a trial, while Luke David Buck had a part-heard sentencing submission. The court also conducted a directions hearing for David Shaw versus the State of Tasmania. Other matters included mention hearings, legal arguments, and directions hearings via video-link from various prisons and locations.

The court addressed several legal issues, including the admissibility of evidence in criminal trials, the appropriate sentencing for defendants, and procedural directions for ongoing criminal cases. The court needed to decide on the validity of applications for bail, consents for bail, and the scheduling of future hearings. The legal matters involved interpretation of criminal law, adherence to procedural fairness, and the consideration of mitigating and aggravating factors in sentencing.

The reasoning and outcome of the court varied with each case. For instance, the court had to evaluate the credibility and relevance of evidence presented during trials. In the directions hearings, the court set timelines and procedural steps for the efficient progression of the cases. Sentencing submissions involved a detailed consideration of the defendant's circumstances and the principles of justice and deterrence. The court's decisions were made in accordance with established legal principles and the specific facts of each case.

The final orders included setting trial dates, approving bail conditions, and scheduling further hearings. The court ensured that all parties were informed of the next steps and any specific requirements for the proceedings. Each case was managed with due regard to the rights of the accused, the interests of the prosecution, and the need for an orderly and just process.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established