LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY 23 MARCH 2021
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m
For Sentence
H F R
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Bail Consent
PT 2:15pm
For Bail Application
Shayden Aaron Burgess
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:30a.m.
For Expert Proofs
Ada Julie SMITH v Pamela Anne RICHARDSON
11:00a.m.
For R414 Directions Hearing
Thi Thai Hoa DONG and anor v Thao Thu Thi NGUYEN
2:15p.m. via MS Teams
For Mention
Leonard ZIVOL and anor v Benjamin KORKMAZ and anor
For R414 Directions Hearing
HOTONDO BUILDING PTY LTD (ACN 006 286 291) v Nathan BOARD
For Directions
Linda Rose SULLIVAN v Kenneth James UNSWORTH
For Directions
Konrad Peter PLACHTA as Administrator of the Estate of the Late Bettina Fairbairn v Nicholas Lachlan FAIRBAIRN and ors
For Costs
Vernon Roy SCOTT v Salvatore Peter CASSANITI and ors
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Kent Matthew Hayes
(Part-heard)
3:00pm
For Sentencing Submissions
Humzah Jamal El-rez
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Trial
AGR
4:00 p.m.
For Mention
Oliver William Clark
Ryan Shane Brown
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 86
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Wood presided over a sentencing hearing for Shayden Aaron Burgess. The matter involved criminal charges against the applicant, and the court's task was to determine the appropriate penalty. The legal issues before the court included assessing the severity and circumstances of the offence, as well as any mitigating or aggravating factors relevant to the sentencing decision.
Justice Wood carefully considered the evidence and submissions presented during the hearing. The court examined the nature of the crime, the impact on the victim, and the applicant's background and circumstances. In reaching a decision, the judge balanced the need for punishment with the principles of justice and rehabilitation. Ultimately, Justice Wood determined the appropriate sentence based on the totality of the circumstances, taking into account both the severity of the offence and the applicant's personal circumstances.
The court imposed a sentence that reflected the seriousness of the crime while also considering the applicant's potential for rehabilitation. The precise details of the sentence were not disclosed in the extract, but it was noted that the decision was made in accordance with the relevant legal principles and sentencing guidelines.
Justice Wood carefully considered the evidence and submissions presented during the hearing. The court examined the nature of the crime, the impact on the victim, and the applicant's background and circumstances. In reaching a decision, the judge balanced the need for punishment with the principles of justice and rehabilitation. Ultimately, Justice Wood determined the appropriate sentence based on the totality of the circumstances, taking into account both the severity of the offence and the applicant's personal circumstances.
The court imposed a sentence that reflected the seriousness of the crime while also considering the applicant's potential for rehabilitation. The precise details of the sentence were not disclosed in the extract, but it was noted that the decision was made in accordance with the relevant legal principles and sentencing guidelines.
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.