LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 23 FEBRUARY 2021
HOBARTCourt 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m
For Mention
Shannon Lee Burridge
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Rachelle Maree O’Brien
(Part-heard)
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link
Matthew John Davey
PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Directions hearing via telephone and
via video-link from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Lily Sara Foster
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Plea
John Maxwell James Tatnell
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:30a.m. For Mention
Elizabeth Jane Hope as personal representative of the Estate of Peter Lyndsay Hope and ors v George Papoutsakis and ors
For Expert Reports
Wendy Jan (Oldham) Reid v Dr Nathanael Sweeney and anor
12:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing – Originating Application
Kara Michelle Browning v Stephen Fahan Dixon (As Executor of the Will of the Late Donald John Browning)
For Directions Hearing – Originating Application Phillip Crosswell v Neil Robert Readett Executor of the estate of Alan McGinniss
2:15p.m. via Microsoft Teams
For R414 Directions Hearing
Sarbo Securities Pty Ltd (ACN 004 887 469) v J Hutchinson Pty Ltd and ors
For Directions Hearing
Borg Manufacturing Pty Limited (ACN 003 246 357) v John Van’t Sant
For Directions Hearing
Linda Rose Sullivan v Kenneth James Unsworth
For Directions Hearing
CHAMBER MATTER
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
9:45am
For Admission to the Legal Profession
Claudia Paige Thomas
Donetta Lucile Ditton
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Heath Maxwell Lethborg
(part-heard)
4:00pm
For Mention
Mitchell William Bullen
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Directions Hearing by telephone
Selina Rush
v
Motor Accidents Compensation Tribunal and anor
4:30pm
For Directions Hearing by telephone
Nancy Carolann Jane White & Ors as Executors of the Will of Irene Vorlicek
v
Galina Verjbitsky and anor
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Levi Joseph David Hall
4:15p.m.
For Directions hearing via telephone and
via video-link to PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Lily Sara Foster
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 49
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
This case involved several criminal and civil proceedings before various courts in Tasmania. The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a number of cases, including a mention for Shannon Lee Burridge and a plea for John Maxwell James Tatnell. The court also heard a part-heard trial for Rachelle Maree O’Brien, and a directions hearing for Matthew John Davey. Additionally, the court considered originating applications and expert reports in civil cases.
The legal issues before the court included procedural matters in both criminal and civil cases, such as directions hearings, pleas, and admission to the legal profession. The court needed to address how to proceed with the cases, ensure that legal processes were followed, and manage the logistics of hearings, especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, which affected the mode of hearings.
The court's reasoning focused on ensuring that the legal processes were adhered to, especially in the context of remote hearings necessitated by public health guidelines. The court provided directions for the continuation of the cases, ensured that all parties were aware of the procedural steps, and managed the logistics of the hearings. The court's outcome was to set specific dates and arrangements for the continuation of the cases, ensuring that justice was administered efficiently and effectively.
The final orders included setting specific dates for the continuation of trials and hearings, arranging for remote participation where necessary, and ensuring that all parties were informed of the procedural steps and timelines. The court aimed to balance the need for procedural fairness with the constraints posed by the ongoing pandemic.
The legal issues before the court included procedural matters in both criminal and civil cases, such as directions hearings, pleas, and admission to the legal profession. The court needed to address how to proceed with the cases, ensure that legal processes were followed, and manage the logistics of hearings, especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, which affected the mode of hearings.
The court's reasoning focused on ensuring that the legal processes were adhered to, especially in the context of remote hearings necessitated by public health guidelines. The court provided directions for the continuation of the cases, ensured that all parties were aware of the procedural steps, and managed the logistics of the hearings. The court's outcome was to set specific dates and arrangements for the continuation of the cases, ensuring that justice was administered efficiently and effectively.
The final orders included setting specific dates for the continuation of trials and hearings, arranging for remote participation where necessary, and ensuring that all parties were informed of the procedural steps and timelines. The court aimed to balance the need for procedural fairness with the constraints posed by the ongoing pandemic.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.