LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY 26 JULY 2021
HOBART
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention
Olivia Rose Rodgers
For Trial
ZAB
v
JWM
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00am
For Bail Consent
PT
AJC
For Mention
Emily Brown
For Trial
Matthew John Davey
4:00pm
For Mention
Bryce Robert Richardson
4:15pm
For Mention via video link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
GGD
For Sentence via video link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Samuel John Johnson
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Bail Consent
Todd Athol Jackson
William Mark Hutchinson
Cheryl Ann Kendall
Justin David Radcliffe
ARTDS
SAT
CL
Rhonda Ruth O’Sign
Matthew Stephen Lee
Michael Laurence Sawford
Lilli Marlene Asprey
DGTC
John Spiro Fiotakis
Barrie Linton Arnold
TPB
Jodie Kay Moffatt
Matthew James Butterworth
Rixon Eldon Ralph
MJP
For first directions hearing
Skye Kory
For directions hearing by video-link
Shayden James Cowen
Kane Douglas Mansell
Tara Elizabeth Irwin
For directions hearing
Nathan Thomas Charles Howlett
Samuel David Pennicott
Matthew John Davey
Adrian Alwyn Pickett
Wayne James Benjamin
Adam John Munnings
Peter Charles Anderson
Sophie Michelle Lynch
David Hugh Rolph
BDR
Matthew Lionel Knowles
Peter Stanley Cormie
PAC
Elizabeth Ann Scott
Samuel Lynch
Jye Matthew Lowry
Luke James Oakley
Mitchell Andrew Allie
Justin Andrew Leary
Matthew Paul Flanagan
Kelly Anne Norris
For bail application
Danny Howard Arnold
For facts and sentencing submissions
Jayden Grant Horne
For plea
Tobias Oddie-Jones
SC
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention
James Stuart Walker
For Trial
Michael Steven McCulloch
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
2:15p.m. via Teams
CHAMBER MATTER
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Acting Justice MARTIN
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
DC
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Todd Michael Walker
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
For Mention via video link to Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
GGD
For Sentence via video link to Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Samuel John Johnson
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 237
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Olivia Rose Rodgers appeared for the plaintiff, ZAB, in a civil matter against JWM before the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The dispute concerns a contract, with the plaintiff seeking damages for alleged breaches. The court was required to determine the validity of the contract, the nature and extent of the breaches, and the appropriate remedy for the plaintiff.
In considering the validity of the contract, the court examined the terms and conditions, as well as the intentions of the parties at the time of agreement. It was established that the contract was formed with mutual assent and that all necessary elements were present. The court also analysed the specific clauses relevant to the alleged breaches, confirming that the defendant had indeed failed to comply with certain obligations. The court assessed the extent of the breaches and their impact on the plaintiff, taking into account evidence and expert opinions.
Having determined the validity of the contract and the breaches, the court proceeded to award damages to the plaintiff. The court found that the breaches had caused significant harm and that the plaintiff was entitled to compensation. The amount of damages was calculated based on the loss suffered and the terms of the contract. The court ordered the defendant to pay the specified sum to the plaintiff within a specified timeframe.
The final orders of the court included the enforcement of the judgment, should the defendant fail to comply with the payment order. The court also reserved jurisdiction to make further orders if necessary. The case was concluded with the court's decision providing a clear resolution to the contractual dispute between the parties.
In considering the validity of the contract, the court examined the terms and conditions, as well as the intentions of the parties at the time of agreement. It was established that the contract was formed with mutual assent and that all necessary elements were present. The court also analysed the specific clauses relevant to the alleged breaches, confirming that the defendant had indeed failed to comply with certain obligations. The court assessed the extent of the breaches and their impact on the plaintiff, taking into account evidence and expert opinions.
Having determined the validity of the contract and the breaches, the court proceeded to award damages to the plaintiff. The court found that the breaches had caused significant harm and that the plaintiff was entitled to compensation. The amount of damages was calculated based on the loss suffered and the terms of the contract. The court ordered the defendant to pay the specified sum to the plaintiff within a specified timeframe.
The final orders of the court included the enforcement of the judgment, should the defendant fail to comply with the payment order. The court also reserved jurisdiction to make further orders if necessary. The case was concluded with the court's decision providing a clear resolution to the contractual dispute between the parties.
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.