LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY, 19 APRIL 2021
HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL BENCH
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Ceremonial Sitting for Recently Appointed Senior Counsel
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10:00a.m.
For Bail Consent
David Shaw
v
State of Tasmania
For Hearing
Port Sorell Bowls Club Inc
v
Kraig Anthony Dann
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Alex Walter Kingston
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video-link to Hobart Reception Prison
SC
For Mention via video link to Court 1,
Alexander Street, Burnie and Launceston Reception Prison
Oscar Jyles Dyett
For Mention
Justin Craig Cleaver
KWDF
Daniel John Ernest Dadson
DMB
Bayley Wayne Bester
JWC
Clinton Anthony Williams
Jack Andrew Cole
Peter Roy Furminger
Stuart Alexander Ferguson
Ty Ferguson
Jenna Maree Black
For Sentence Scott Alfred Robertson
For Sentence and Application for Breach of Order
Johnny David Jones
For Bail Consent
Jason Darrell Triffett
Jack Bradley Harvey
11:15 p.m.
For Mention
Jye David Cowen
4:00 p.m.
For Sentence
John Saether
4:15 p.m
For Sentence
Rachelle Maree O’Brien
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Decision via video link to Court 1,
Alexander Street, Burnie
Daniel Victor of the Family Gandini
v
Tasmania Police and Magistrate D Fairley
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Mention via video-link to Court 1,
Alexander Street, Burnie and to PWR,
Cameron Street, Launceston
David Smith
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
09:30a.m.
For Trial
Aaron James Irwin
(part-heard)
LAUNCESTON
PWR, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
Mention via video-link from Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and to PWR, Cameron Street, Launceston
David Smith
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video link from Court 8,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Oscar Jyles Dyett
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Decision via video link from Court 2,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Daniel Victor of the Family Gandini
v
Tasmania Police and Magistrate D Fairley
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:00p.m.
For Mention via video-link from
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and to PWR, Cameron Street, Launceston
David Smith
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 112
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, the Full Bench presided over a ceremonial sitting to honour recently appointed senior counsel. The case of Port Sorell Bowls Club Inc v Kraig Anthony Dann was heard in Hobart before the Full Court. The dispute pertained to the club's attempt to enforce a by-law prohibiting the consumption of alcohol within the club premises. Kraig Anthony Dann, a member of the club, had been issued a notice for violating this by-law, and the club sought a declaration that the by-law was valid and enforceable.
The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and enforceability of the club's by-law in question. Port Sorell Bowls Club Inc argued that the by-law was validly adopted under the club's constitution and should be enforced to maintain the club's standards. Kraig Anthony Dann contended that the by-law was unreasonable and discriminatory, and that it infringed on his rights as a club member. The court had to determine whether the by-law was indeed unreasonable and discriminatory and whether it was enforceable.
The Full Court, after considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, concluded that the by-law was validly adopted and was not unreasonable or discriminatory. The court found that the by-law served a legitimate purpose in maintaining the club's standards and was not overly restrictive. Consequently, the court upheld the validity and enforceability of the by-law. Port Sorell Bowls Club Inc was granted the declaration it sought, affirming that the by-law was valid and enforceable against its members.
The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation and enforceability of the club's by-law in question. Port Sorell Bowls Club Inc argued that the by-law was validly adopted under the club's constitution and should be enforced to maintain the club's standards. Kraig Anthony Dann contended that the by-law was unreasonable and discriminatory, and that it infringed on his rights as a club member. The court had to determine whether the by-law was indeed unreasonable and discriminatory and whether it was enforceable.
The Full Court, after considering the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, concluded that the by-law was validly adopted and was not unreasonable or discriminatory. The court found that the by-law served a legitimate purpose in maintaining the club's standards and was not overly restrictive. Consequently, the court upheld the validity and enforceability of the by-law. Port Sorell Bowls Club Inc was granted the declaration it sought, affirming that the by-law was valid and enforceable against its members.
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.