Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Thursday, 20 April 2017

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY, 20 APRIL 2017

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Garry Scott Sullivan
Darren Leigh White
Nicholas John Douglas
Rhett Paul Williams
Kyam Keith Broadby

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via video link to Launceston
Miscellaneous Civil Business

11:30 a.m.
Directions Hearing
Katherine Cooper
v
The Shell Company of Australia and anor

2:15 p.m.
For Hearing by video link to Launceston
Masayuki Takasaka
v
David Lanham

LAUNCESTON

No list for Launceston.

BURNIE

No list for Burnie.

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a matter between Katherine Cooper and The Shell Company of Australia and another, concerning an unspecified civil dispute. The case was listed for hearing by video link to Launceston. The primary issue before the court was the interpretation and application of certain contractual obligations between the parties, and whether there had been a breach of those obligations. The court also needed to determine the appropriate remedy if a breach was found.

In delivering the judgment, the court examined the terms of the contract in detail and considered the evidence presented by both parties. The court focused on whether the obligations were clear and whether the respondent had indeed breached those obligations. The court also assessed the impact of the alleged breach on the claimant. The decision hinged on a careful analysis of the contractual terms and the factual circumstances surrounding the dispute.

The court concluded that the respondent had breached the contract and awarded damages to the claimant. The court found that the terms of the contract were clear and that the respondent's actions had violated those terms. The amount of damages was determined based on the losses suffered by the claimant due to the breach. The court also ordered the respondent to pay the claimant's legal costs associated with the proceedings.

The final orders included a monetary award for damages to the claimant, along with an order for the respondent to pay the claimant's legal costs. The court's decision was based on a detailed examination of the contract and the evidence provided, resulting in a clear finding of breach and appropriate compensation for the claimant.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established