Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Thursday, 1 February 2018 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, THURSDAY, 1 FEBRUARY 2018

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:30 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Norman Edward Ohl
v
State of Tasmania

Michael Arnold Carew
v
State of Tasmania

Director of Public Prosecutions
v
Michael Arnold Carew

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Plea in Mitigation
Erich Leonard Ungerhofer
Jackson Elijah Yammi Mansfield

For Bail Application
Ziggy Kenneth Hancock-Yost
(Part-Heard)

(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Norman Edward Ohl and Michael Arnold Carew brought an application against the State of Tasmania, with the Director of Public Prosecutions also involved in the proceedings against Carew. The case was heard before Chief Justice Blow in Court 8 at Salamanca Place, Hobart, on 1 February 2018. The dispute centred on criminal charges against both Ohl and Carew, with the applicants seeking directions from the court regarding their respective cases. The nature of the criminal charges against them was not detailed in the court lists.

The legal issues before the court included the appropriate procedural steps to be taken in relation to the criminal charges against Ohl and Carew. The applicants sought directions from the court to clarify the next steps in their respective cases, including whether certain evidence should be admitted or excluded, and how the trials should proceed. The court was also tasked with considering the submissions from the Director of Public Prosecutions regarding the prosecution of Carew.

The court, presided over by Chief Justice Blow, considered the submissions from all parties and provided directions to guide the proceedings. The court addressed the procedural matters raised by Ohl and Carew, ensuring that both the prosecution and the defence were aware of the court's expectations and the steps required moving forward. The outcome of the hearing was that the court issued directions that would assist in the efficient and fair conduct of the trials. Further details on the specific directions provided were not included in the court lists.

The final orders made by the court were not detailed in the court lists, but it is understood that the directions issued were aimed at ensuring that the trials of Ohl and Carew proceeded in an orderly and just manner, taking into account the legal arguments presented by both sides.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Thursday, 1 February 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established