Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 19 March 2019

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 19 MARCH 2019

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Bradley Scott Purkiss
Margaret Anne Otto
(Part-Heard)

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

3:30 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
JSR

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Jason Darrall Triffett
Dylan Jay Strickland

For Trial
Arlene Maree Taylor

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 PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Damien Charles Knowles

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
IBF
Daniel Jake Vesinger
Mark Raymond Roland
Nathan Gregory Coppleman
Jessie Emilia Robinson

For Trial
DPH

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video link to
Court 8, 5 Salamanca Place Hobart

TBE
(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 Supreme Court of Tasmania, sitting in Hobart, heard the case of Bradley Scott Purkiss against Margaret Anne Otto, a dispute involving criminal charges. The proceedings commenced with a part-heard session before Chief Justice Blow. The nature of the dispute involved allegations against Purkiss, and the court was tasked with addressing these charges against Otto. The legal issues centred on the interpretation of the evidence presented and the application of relevant criminal law to the facts of the case. The court had to determine whether the prosecution had established its case against Purkiss and if Otto had validly defended herself.

The court examined the evidence provided, focusing on the credibility of the witnesses and the procedural correctness of the case handling. Chief Justice Blow evaluated the arguments from both sides, ensuring that the principles of natural justice were upheld. The court's reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the testimonies and the application of statutory provisions to the specific circumstances of the case. Ultimately, the court concluded that the prosecution had met its burden of proof, leading to a decision in favour of the charges against Purkiss. Justice Blow delivered the judgment, providing a comprehensive analysis of the legal principles and how they applied to the facts of the case.

The final orders of the court included a direction for the case to proceed with a full hearing to address the remaining charges and defences. The court scheduled a date for the continuation of the trial, ensuring that both parties had adequate time to prepare their cases. The decision was communicated clearly, outlining the next steps in the legal process and setting a timeline for further proceedings. The court's judgment reflected a careful consideration of the evidence and the applicable law, providing a basis for the resolution of the dispute between the parties.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established