Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 12 July 2016 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 12 JULY 2016

HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Stuart Barry Russell
v
State of Tasmania

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Mention
A Witness

In Court as in Chambers
For Bail Application via video-link to Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Joshua James Quarry

For Bail Application
Adam James Bishop

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm
In Court as in Chambers
For Bail Application via video-link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Joshua James Quarry

BURNIE

No list for Burnie.

(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

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

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania was involved in a range of hearings on 12 July 2016, with both criminal and civil matters being addressed across various courts and locations. In Hobart, the court dealt with a directions hearing in the case of Stuart Barry Russell versus the State of Tasmania. Additionally, a bail application for Joshua James Quarry was heard via video-link from Launceston, while Adam James Bishop also had a bail application heard in Launceston. In Launceston, Justice Estcourt presided over a bail application via video-link from Hobart involving Joshua James Quarry. Associate Justice Holt was in charge of miscellaneous civil business in Hobart, while Burnie did not have any listed cases for that day.

The legal issues before the court encompassed a variety of matters, including directions in ongoing criminal cases, bail applications in criminal proceedings, and miscellaneous civil business. The court was tasked with ensuring that the legal processes were adhered to, particularly in the administration of justice and the handling of bail applications. In the case of the directions hearing, the court needed to clarify the procedural steps and timeline for the case of Stuart Barry Russell versus the State of Tasmania. For the bail applications, the court had to assess whether the applicants met the criteria for bail and whether their release would pose a risk to the community or undermine the administration of justice.

The court's reasoning and outcome were reflected in the handling of each matter. For the directions hearing, the court likely provided specific instructions on the next steps and deadlines for the parties involved. In relation to the bail applications, the court considered the evidence presented and the potential risks associated with releasing the applicants on bail. The decision on whether to grant bail would have been based on a balance between the rights of the accused and the need to protect the community. The miscellaneous civil business would have involved resolving various civil disputes or administrative matters, with the court providing judgments or orders as appropriate.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court of Tasmania addressed a number of legal matters on 12 July 2016, demonstrating its role in both criminal and civil jurisdictions. The court's handling of directions hearings, bail applications, and civil business showcased its commitment to ensuring that justice is administered fairly and efficiently.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 12 July 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established