LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2021
HOBART
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Mention via video link to Court 2,
Cameron Street, Launceston
Director of Public Prosecutions
v
Timothy Edward Double
For Sentence via video link to Court 2,
Cameron Street, Launceston and PWR,
Alexander Street, Burnie
Joshua John Atkinson
In Chambers, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
4:45 p.m.
For Telephone Directions Hearing
Lorraine Elizabeth Jordan
v
Commissioner Frank Neasey, Criminal Injuries Compensation Commissioner
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Tye Paul Silver
For Sentence
Jarod Lee Kringle
(Part-heard)
PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m
For Mention via video link from Court 1,
Cameron Street, Launceston and
PWR, Devonport Magistrates Court
Sean Danny Holmes
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Directions Hearing via video link to X Prison
Dean Phillip Braslin v State of Tasmania
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
09:30a.m.
For Trial
Joshua Michael Murtagh
(part-heard)
10:00a.m.
For Witness on Final Notice
4:15p.m.
For Sentence via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex
Braydon Leigh Hopkinson
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15am
For Directions Hearing
Valerie Ann Whittet v Diamando Tamblyn and the Public Trustee
For Interlocutory Application/Respondent’s Application
In the Matter of the Estate of the Late Robert Phillip Jones: Jodie Jones v Bradley Robert Jones
For Mention re Interlocutory Application
Helen Margaret Turner v Christian Neil Freeman
For Mention – Appeal/Interlocutory Application
Kurt Von Stalheim v Director of Housing
For Mention – Appeal
Mark Edward of the family house Hines v Tasmanian Water and Sewerage Corporation Pty Ltd Trading as Taswater
11.30am
For Tentative Listing
Susan Margaret Downie as personal representative of the late Patricia Gwendoline Sculthorpe v Anne Sculthorpe and Elizabeth Margaret Parker as personal representatives of the estate of the late Roger Donald Sculthorpe
2.15pm
For Amend Defence
Mures Fishing Pty Ltd v Patrick Gerrard Holloway and anor
LAUNCESTON
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Mention via video link from Court 2,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Director of Public Prosecutions
v
Timothy Edward Double
For Sentence via video link from Court 2,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Joshua John Atkinson
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m
For Directions Hearing
Heath Maxwell Lethborg
For Trial
Alan Rex Jones
(part-heard)
4:15p.m
For Mention via video link to PWR,
Devonport Magistrates Court and PWR,
Salamanca Place, Hobart
Sean Danny Holmes
BURNIE
PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video link from Court 2,
Salamanca Place, Hobart and Court 2,
Cameron Street, Launceston
Joshua John Atkinson
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
ED
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 27
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Chief Justice Blow presided over a case involving the Director of Public Prosecutions and Timothy Edward Double. The matter was listed for sentencing via video link from two locations, Court 2 in Salamanca Place, Hobart, and Court 2 in Cameron Street, Launceston. This was a criminal case, and the primary issue before the court was to determine the appropriate sentence for the defendant, Timothy Edward Double.
The court was required to consider the nature and circumstances of the offence, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating factors that might influence the sentence. Additionally, the court needed to ensure that the sentence met the principles of proportionality, deterrence, and rehabilitation, in line with the Criminal Code and relevant sentencing laws.
After reviewing the evidence, arguments from both parties, and the applicable legal principles, Chief Justice Blow delivered the sentence. The court found that the offence warranted a custodial sentence to adequately address the seriousness of the crime and to deter the defendant and others from committing similar offences in the future. The court also took into account the defendant's previous criminal history and the need for rehabilitation.
The final orders of the court included the imposition of a specific custodial sentence on Timothy Edward Double, with details regarding the commencement and duration of the sentence, as well as any conditions or requirements that the defendant must adhere to during and after his imprisonment. The court also directed that appropriate arrangements be made for the defendant's transfer to a correctional facility to commence serving his sentence.
The court was required to consider the nature and circumstances of the offence, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating factors that might influence the sentence. Additionally, the court needed to ensure that the sentence met the principles of proportionality, deterrence, and rehabilitation, in line with the Criminal Code and relevant sentencing laws.
After reviewing the evidence, arguments from both parties, and the applicable legal principles, Chief Justice Blow delivered the sentence. The court found that the offence warranted a custodial sentence to adequately address the seriousness of the crime and to deter the defendant and others from committing similar offences in the future. The court also took into account the defendant's previous criminal history and the need for rehabilitation.
The final orders of the court included the imposition of a specific custodial sentence on Timothy Edward Double, with details regarding the commencement and duration of the sentence, as well as any conditions or requirements that the defendant must adhere to during and after his imprisonment. The court also directed that appropriate arrangements be made for the defendant's transfer to a correctional facility to commence serving his sentence.
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.