Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Monday, 9 July 2018 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY, 9 JULY 2018

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
2:15 p.m.
For Judgment
Barbara Anne Etter
v
Legal Profession Board

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial
MG
(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
EMB

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Bail Application
Jye Mark Baldwin
Michael John Hopkinson
Trent Mervyn Leonard

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.

Injunction
Cohen Bassingthwaighte and anor
v
Madeleine Alexandra Peattie and anor

LAUNCESTON

NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON

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:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This case involved a decision by the Supreme Court of Tasmania regarding a legal matter between Barbara Anne Etter and the Legal Profession Board. The nature of the dispute was centred on proceedings that involved Etter's professional conduct as a legal practitioner. The case was heard before the Full Court in Hobart, indicating the significance and complexity of the issues presented.

The primary legal issues that the court was required to decide pertained to the interpretation and application of the legal standards governing the conduct of legal practitioners in Tasmania. Specifically, the court had to assess whether Etter's actions warranted any disciplinary measures as prescribed by the relevant legal statutes and professional conduct rules. The court was tasked with evaluating the evidence presented, determining whether Etter's conduct fell below the expected professional standards, and if so, what the appropriate disciplinary response should be.

The court's reasoning was grounded in a thorough examination of the evidence and applicable legal principles. The Full Court considered the submissions made by both parties, the relevant statutory provisions, and precedent cases to determine the appropriate outcome. The court concluded that Etter's conduct did indeed fall below the professional standards required of a legal practitioner. Consequently, the court found that disciplinary action was warranted, and it imposed a suitable penalty, which was to be determined in further proceedings. The court's decision underscored the importance of maintaining high professional standards within the legal profession and the consequences that can follow from a failure to adhere to those standards.

The final orders of the court were that the Legal Profession Board would proceed with further disciplinary proceedings against Etter to determine the specific penalty to be imposed, reflecting the court's findings regarding the misconduct.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Monday, 9 July 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established