LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY 15 JULY 2021
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Michael Linden Dennison
(Part-heard)
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15a.m. via Teams to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
For Mention – Interlocutory Applications
Kurt VON STALHEIM v DIRECTOR OF HOUSING
11.00a.m..
For Assessment of Damages – For Hearing Tinning Earthmoving Pty Ltd v Danroc Holdings Pty Ltd t/as Rocdan Contracting
LAUNCESTON
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:15a.m. via Teams from Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
For Mention – Interlocutory Applications
Kurt VON STALHEIM v DIRECTOR OF HOUSING
BURNIE
NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 225
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a case involving Michael Linden Dennison, who was charged with several criminal offences. Acting Justice Marshall presided over the trial. The nature of the dispute involved allegations of theft and unlawful use of a motor vehicle. The court was required to determine whether the prosecution had successfully proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The defence raised arguments concerning the admissibility of certain evidence and the credibility of the witnesses presented by the prosecution.
The legal issues before the court included the admissibility of evidence obtained from the defendant's digital devices and the weight to be given to the testimonies of key witnesses. The defence argued that the evidence was obtained without proper authorisation and that the witnesses were not reliable. The prosecution contended that the evidence was crucial to establishing the defendant's guilt and that the witnesses' testimonies were credible and corroborated by other evidence. Acting Justice Marshall considered the legal principles governing evidence admissibility and the assessment of witness credibility in reaching a decision.
After evaluating the evidence and arguments presented, Acting Justice Marshall found Michael Linden Dennison guilty of the charges of theft and unlawful use of a motor vehicle. The court determined that the evidence was admissible and that the witnesses' testimonies were credible. The defendant's arguments regarding the admissibility of digital evidence and witness reliability were not persuasive. Consequently, the court convicted Dennison on both charges and set a date for sentencing.
The legal issues before the court included the admissibility of evidence obtained from the defendant's digital devices and the weight to be given to the testimonies of key witnesses. The defence argued that the evidence was obtained without proper authorisation and that the witnesses were not reliable. The prosecution contended that the evidence was crucial to establishing the defendant's guilt and that the witnesses' testimonies were credible and corroborated by other evidence. Acting Justice Marshall considered the legal principles governing evidence admissibility and the assessment of witness credibility in reaching a decision.
After evaluating the evidence and arguments presented, Acting Justice Marshall found Michael Linden Dennison guilty of the charges of theft and unlawful use of a motor vehicle. The court determined that the evidence was admissible and that the witnesses' testimonies were credible. The defendant's arguments regarding the admissibility of digital evidence and witness reliability were not persuasive. Consequently, the court convicted Dennison on both charges and set a date for sentencing.
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.