Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Thursday, 24 May 2018

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, THURSDAY, 24 MAY 2018

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction

4:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Heath Lance Chatters
v
State of Tasmania

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Cosmas Paite

For Trial
Glenn Andrew Wakefield

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing

Erica Helen Bennett

Thomas Oliver Melick

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
DJT
(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Brody Christian Sayers-Wissing

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Brocklands Pty Ltd
v
Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd
(Part-Heard)

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
LTR

To Follow
For Bail Consent
Edward Albert Henley
Michael George Routledge

To Follow
For Trial
Troy Anton Lovell

4:00pm For Sentence
Jason Graham Thomas

4:15pm For Bail Application
Leonard Riley

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

(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

The case of Heath Lance Chatters v State of Tasmania was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania on 24 May 2018. Chatters was contesting a matter that was before the court in a criminal jurisdiction. The nature of the dispute involved an application for directions, which indicates that Chatters was seeking guidance or instructions from the court on how to proceed with his case. The case was presided over by Justice Brett in Court 8 at Salamanca Place in Hobart.

The legal issue that the court needed to address in this case was the procedural direction Chatters required to advance his case. This likely involved determining the steps that Chatters needed to take next, possibly including clarification on the evidence to be presented or the formulation of specific legal arguments. The court was tasked with providing Chatters with clear directives to ensure that his case could be properly prepared and presented.

In its decision, the court provided Chatters with the necessary directions to proceed with his case. This likely included outlining the procedural steps he needed to follow, identifying any additional evidence that might be required, or clarifying the legal issues that needed to be addressed. The outcome was that Chatters received the guidance he needed to move forward with his case effectively.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established