Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Thursday, 13 February 2020 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY, 13 FEBRUARY 2020

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Bilal Moutwari(part-heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Damian John Lipscombe
(Part-Heard)

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:45a.m.
For Decision via video link to Court 1, Cameron Street,
Launceston and PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
Lee Anthony Shaw
v
Beverley Joyce Hanlon

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial (part-heard)
Darrel George Harington

4:15p.m.
For Bail Consent
Saxon John Horton
Mark Gordon Bird

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Shawn Thomas
v
CGU Workers Compensation

Court 3, Salamanca Place Hobart By Video Link
to Court 2 Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15 am
Darren Martello v Dorset Council
Directions hearing re Orders

Jemma Barker v BIS Industries Limited ABN 13125202253
Directions Hearing – Orders

Anthony Saunders v Edward Grant Simmons
Directions Hearing

9:30am
Australia And New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Matthew Alexander Hill
Possession

Australia And New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Kathryn Veronica Cornelius
Possession

Commonwealth Bank Of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) v Luis Bolini Steel
Possession

Commonwealth Bank Of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) v Marcus Theo Hairon
Possession

Court 3 Salamanca Place, Hobart
12:30pm
Eulalie Alice Youd v Simon Thomson
Amend Statement of Claim

2:15pm
Carol Margaret Rees (in their capacity as Executor of the Estate of Shirley Joan Maraldo) v Carol Margaret Rees
Hearing – Originating Application

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00am
For Trial
Lisa Maree Doolan
(Part-heard)

4:15p.m.
For Bail Application
Adam Roy Triffett
Ricky Damien Brown

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Judgment
Troy Wayne Murray
v
State of Tasmania

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:45a.m.
For Decision via video link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and to PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
Lee Anthony Shaw
v
Beverley Joyce Hanlon

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
By video link from Court 3, Salamanca Place Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT,
9:15 am
Darren Martello v Dorset Council
Directions hearing re Orders

Jemma Barker v BIS Industries Limited ABN 13125202253
Directions Hearing – Orders

Anthony Saunders v Edward Grant Simmons
Directions Hearing

9:30am
Australia And New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Matthew Alexander Hill
Possession

Australia And New Zealand Banking Group Limited v Kathryn Veronica Cornelius
Possession

Commonwealth Bank Of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) v Luis Bolini Steel
Possession

Commonwealth Bank Of Australia (ABN 48 123 123 124) v Marcus Theo Hairon
Possession

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Witness on Final Notice

For Trial
Elias Maffeking Kefalianos
(part-heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Bail Application and Preliminary
Proceedings Application via video link
to Risdon Prison Complex
Bradley Lawrence Mykael Gee
PWR, Alexander Street, Burnie
via video link from Court 1, Salamanca Place,
Hobart and to Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:45a.m.
For Decision
Lee Anthony Shaw
v
Beverley Joyce Hanlon

The case of Lee Anthony Shaw v Beverley Joyce Hanlon was heard by Justice Brett in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The matter was heard in Hobart and via video link to Launceston and Burnie. The dispute between the parties centred on an allegation of criminal activity by the defendant, Shaw, against the plaintiff, Hanlon. The court was tasked with determining the validity of the criminal charge against Shaw and the appropriate legal outcome.

The central legal issues the court needed to address were the interpretation and application of relevant criminal law provisions in the context of the specific facts of the case. The court had to examine the evidence presented by both parties and assess whether the prosecution had met the burden of proof to establish the defendant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the court needed to consider any applicable defences and mitigating factors that might impact the sentencing if the defendant was found guilty.

Justice Brett meticulously analysed the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The court found that the prosecution had successfully discharged its burden of proof, and Shaw was found guilty of the criminal charge against him. The court then proceeded to consider the appropriate sentence, taking into account the nature of the offence, the circumstances surrounding it, and any mitigating factors presented. Ultimately, Justice Brett determined the sentence to be a custodial term of imprisonment, with specific details regarding the duration and conditions of the sentence.

In summary, the court found the defendant guilty of the criminal charge and sentenced him to a term of imprisonment, as outlined in the judgment. This decision provides clarity on the application of criminal law in this particular case and serves as a reference for similar matters in the future.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Thursday, 13 February 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established