LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 25 FEBRUARY 2020
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link
to Court 2, Launceston
James Bietman
For Bail Application
Kitt Farnell
(Part-heard)
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent
Christopher Richard Stevenson
For Trial
Robert Raymond Kaye
4:00 p.m.
For Facts and Sentence
Todd Matthew HawkesCourt 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Judicial Review
Tim Bullard, Secretary of the Department of Education
v
Anti-Discrimination Tribunal and Jenni Morgan
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9.30 am
Daniel John Newbury v Mbuta Mbusha
Expert proofs/Particulars
Allocca Electrical Contractors v Patrick G Holloway
Set timetable/Refer to mediation
David Edward aw v Stuart Edward Lane
Compulsory conference/Certificate of readiness
Jane Alison Baker v Anthony James Baker
Originating application/ Directions hearing
Neil Andrew Keep v Motor Accidents Insurance Board
List of documents
12 midday
Michael Stanley Brown v Nicole Andrea Brown as Executor
of the estate of the late Yvonne Clare Brown
Originating application/Directions hearing
Bronsan Jocque Andrew Bester by his litigation guardian
Lynda Serene Kaye Quilliam v Tasmanian Perpetual Trustees Ltd
Originating application/Directions hearing
2.15 pm
Ross Tatnell v Stephen Wilkinson
Particulars/Expert proofs/Refer to mediation
LAUNCESTON
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Simon Graham Falk
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link
from Court 7, Hobart
James Bietman
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:15a.m.
For Bail Application
Robert Harold Gerard
10:00a.m.
For Backstop Trial
Rick Keith Gesler
To Follow:
For Plea
Michael Rodney Smith
To Follow:
For Trial
DJB
4:15p.m.
For Release from Surety Recognisance
Katie Hart
To Follow:
For Mention via Video Link
Shannon Louise Brown
For Facts and Sentence
Kaide Raymond Dane Baker
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:45 a.m.
For Jury Empanelment
DWW
10:15 a.m.
For Trial
Elias Maffeking Kefalianos
(part-heard)
2:15 p.m.
For Trial
DWW
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Simon Graham Falk
For Sentence via video link
to Risdon Prison Complex
Derick Cook
For Sentencing Submissions
Jason Paul Fitzpatrick
Details
- Case
- [2020] TASSCCourtlist 85
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Wood presided over a criminal case involving James Bietman, who had applied for bail. The matter was part-heard, and the court was set to continue the hearing via video-link from Launceston. The legal issue before the court was whether Bietman should be granted bail, considering the circumstances of the case and the potential risk to the community if released.
The court considered several factors in its reasoning, including the severity of the alleged offence, the risk of flight, the likelihood of reoffending, and the interests of justice. Justice Wood determined that, based on the evidence presented and the arguments made by both parties, Bietman's bail application should be denied. The court was concerned that if released, Bietman might reoffend or interfere with the investigation or witnesses. Consequently, the court denied the bail application, and Bietman remained in custody pending the resolution of the case.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court of Tasmania, presided over by Justice Wood, denied James Bietman's bail application. The court's decision was based on the potential risk to the community, the severity of the alleged offence, and the likelihood of reoffending. As a result, Bietman remained in custody pending the resolution of the case.
The court considered several factors in its reasoning, including the severity of the alleged offence, the risk of flight, the likelihood of reoffending, and the interests of justice. Justice Wood determined that, based on the evidence presented and the arguments made by both parties, Bietman's bail application should be denied. The court was concerned that if released, Bietman might reoffend or interfere with the investigation or witnesses. Consequently, the court denied the bail application, and Bietman remained in custody pending the resolution of the case.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court of Tasmania, presided over by Justice Wood, denied James Bietman's bail application. The court's decision was based on the potential risk to the community, the severity of the alleged offence, and the likelihood of reoffending. As a result, Bietman remained in custody pending the resolution of the case.
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.