Law Lists for the Supreme Court Of Tasmania Tuesday 10 August 2021 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA Tuesday 10 AUGUST 2021

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
11:00 a.m.
For Motion to Review
Salina Maree Cotton
v
Scott Wilkie

2:15 p.m.
For Application
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania
v
A Legal Practitioner

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00am
For Trial
MJD

4:15pm
For Ground Rules Hearing
JKW
Heath Lance Chatters

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
4:30pm
For Directions Hearing
Highview360 Pty Ltd v Merost Pty Ltd

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
09:30a.m.
For Trial
John Charles Reardon
(part-heard)

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Acting Justice MARTIN
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing

Phillip Edward Rylands

For Trial
Robert Peter Matthewson
(part heard)

4:15p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Benjamin Thomas Lynch

For Bail Variation
Candida Alice Smedley

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction

10am
For directions hearing
Marlon Laguador
Benjamin David Pyke
Milner Maynard Wimutu

For breach of bail, and for application to withdraw as surety re
Brandon Leigh Fletcher-Jones

For plea
LEB

11am
For trial
BKSM

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Salina Maree Cotton v Scott Wilkie was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The dispute between the parties centred around a legal matter that required the court's review. The case was presided over by Justice Estcourt in Hobart. The court was tasked with determining the legal issues presented in the motion to review the case.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the motion to review was valid and warranted a reconsideration of the original decision. The court had to examine the grounds upon which the motion was based and assess whether they met the criteria for a review. Additionally, the court needed to determine if the motion was filed within the appropriate time frame and if there were any new or substantial evidence that warranted a review.

In delivering the decision, Justice Estcourt outlined the legal principles and precedents relevant to the motion to review. The court found that the motion did not meet the necessary criteria for a review as it did not present any new or substantial evidence that would warrant a reconsideration of the original decision. Furthermore, the court held that the motion was filed outside the appropriate time frame, thus further negating the grounds for a review. Consequently, the court dismissed the motion.

As a result of the court's decision, the motion to review was dismissed, and the original decision remained unchanged. The parties were bound by the outcome of the initial decision, and no further review was granted.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court Of Tasmania Tuesday 10 August 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established