LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY, 20 SEPTEMBER 2021
HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Telephone Directions Hearing
William John Christopher McFardzean Foran
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex
James Stephen William Russon
Ryan Jamie Francis Bester
Samuel David Pennicott
Alex Gordon Large
Joshua Dillon Astell
For Directions Hearing
Christopher Alex Lobley
David Gregory Bannister
Matthew Steven Lee
Adrian Michael Flounders
Anthony James Hill
Edward Adam Rolins
Jorden Bird
MJP
Jake Mark Pearce
James Bietman
For Bail Consent Michael Dennis Briers
James Harold Coomer
Arron Roots
Daniel John Ernest Dadson
William Mark Hutchinson
Sebastian Hugo Hartmann
HCT
Rachel Naomi Perri
Joe Robert Moeakiola
Mark Kyle Sherman
Neville Bruce Perryman
Lisa Anne Perryman
Brett Raymond Fenton
PT
Christopher William Blackwell
Tara Elizabeth Irwin
TPB
Christine Leila Lang
Elizabeth Ann Scott
Marcus Alexander Clayton
Gregory John Hall
Lilli Marlene Asprey
Anthony Trevor Sculthorpe
Kyle Dion Power
Melinda Ann Berry
Jessica Justine Dianne Abbott
For Sentence
Kane Douglas Mansell
For Plea
Justin Leary
Justin David Radcliffe
For Application to Vary Bail
Corey Adam Lockwood
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent
Matthew Robert Smith
For Mention
Carla Elizabeth Thomas
Peter Richard Anderson
For Trial
Benjamin Thomas Lynch
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 am
For Bail Application
Simon Cole Wigg
10:00 am
For Directions Heating
John William Milligan
Timothy Shaun Van Den Bosch
For Trial
Jeremy Andrew Ross
4:15 pm
For Preliminary Proceedings Application
Joshua Kevin Beard
Aaron Raymond McCulloch
For Directions Hearing
Jaqueline Broomhall
Michael John Cowie
Peter Arthur Edwards Nibbs
For Hearing
JSS
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 314
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
William John Christopher McFarrzean faced a court in Hobart before Justice Wood for a telephone directions hearing. The nature of the dispute involved McFarrzean and the legal proceedings against him. The court was tasked with addressing the procedural aspects of the case, including scheduling and other logistical matters. The legal issues centred on the procedural fairness and the efficient management of the criminal proceedings against McFarrzean. The court needed to ensure that all parties were adequately informed and that the trial could proceed in an orderly and timely manner.
Justice Wood considered the need for clear communication and coordination among the parties involved. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to the scheduled timelines and ensuring that all participants were aware of their roles and responsibilities. In reaching a decision, the court balanced the rights of the defendant with the need for an expeditious resolution of the case. The outcome was a set of directions that aimed to streamline the proceedings while safeguarding the defendant's rights. The court issued orders to ensure that the case would proceed efficiently, with specific instructions on the next steps for both the prosecution and the defence.
The final orders included detailed scheduling for upcoming hearings, instructions for filing any necessary documentation, and specific directives for both parties to prepare for the next stages of the trial. These orders were designed to facilitate a smooth and fair process for all involved. The court's decision underscored the importance of procedural clarity and the need for both parties to cooperate in moving the case forward.
Justice Wood considered the need for clear communication and coordination among the parties involved. The court emphasised the importance of adhering to the scheduled timelines and ensuring that all participants were aware of their roles and responsibilities. In reaching a decision, the court balanced the rights of the defendant with the need for an expeditious resolution of the case. The outcome was a set of directions that aimed to streamline the proceedings while safeguarding the defendant's rights. The court issued orders to ensure that the case would proceed efficiently, with specific instructions on the next steps for both the prosecution and the defence.
The final orders included detailed scheduling for upcoming hearings, instructions for filing any necessary documentation, and specific directives for both parties to prepare for the next stages of the trial. These orders were designed to facilitate a smooth and fair process for all involved. The court's decision underscored the importance of procedural clarity and the need for both parties to cooperate in moving the case forward.
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.