Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Thursday, 21 June 2018

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA THURSDAY, 21 JUNE 2018

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
JWK

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence

Simon Anthony Catto

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial
EMB
(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing by video link
to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Daiki Ishikawa-Browne

For Sentence
Cosmas Paite

For Bail Application
NMM
(Part-Heard)

For Sentencing Submissions
Zen Caley

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. by Video Link to Launceston
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30am For Trial
Zachary Robert French

4:15pm For Preliminary Proceedings Application
Kylie Margaret Kearnes

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

4:15pm For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Daiki Ishikawa-Browne

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Mention
IJM

For Trial

ES
(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 matter of Cosmas Paite, the Supreme Court of Tasmania delivered a decision regarding a bail application. The applicant, Paite, sought release on bail pending his sentencing for a criminal offence. The court was tasked with determining whether the applicant met the criteria for bail under the Bail Act 1977 (Tas). Specifically, the court had to assess the risk of the applicant failing to appear in court, the risk of reoffending, and the impact of the applicant being remanded in custody versus being released on bail.

The court considered various factors, including Paite's criminal history, the nature and circumstances of the offence, the likelihood of the applicant complying with bail conditions, and the views of the victim. Justice Brett found that the applicant's extensive criminal history and the serious nature of the offence presented a significant risk of reoffending. Additionally, the court noted that the community's safety and the protection of potential victims were paramount. Consequently, the court determined that the risk of reoffending outweighed any potential benefit of granting bail.

As a result, the court dismissed the bail application, ruling that Paite should remain in custody pending his sentencing. The final orders reflect this decision, mandating that Paite remain in custody until his sentencing hearing. This decision underscores the court's commitment to balancing the rights of the accused with the imperative of public safety and the prevention of reoffending.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established