LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, TUESDAY, 28 APRIL, 2020
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
Sean William McKenzie
Duc Van Nguyen
Zack David Devine
Aaron Jacob Wright
Peter David Leaman
Justin Craig Cleaver
Hayden Dean Scott Stone
Andrew James Calvert
Belinda Elizabeth Dobson
For Directions Hearing
Damian Andrew Ferguson
Nathan Allan Scott
Renee Paula Trojan
Adrian Brian John Hall
For Bail Variation
Ryan Edward Brown
For Bail Consent
Sean Peter Burk
Andrew Brett Bell
Sharon Maree Bailey
Anmar Elnami
Luke David King
Tamika Lee Moeakiola
Cheyenne Margaret McGuire
Bradley Kenneth Brown
Yohannes Tesdeasilassie Tsegazeb
John Edward Bailey
Robert Maxwell Brown
Shannon Lee Burridge
Saxon John Horton
Thomas Joseph Gardam
2:15p.m.
For Bail Application (part-heard)
William Davidson
For Bail Application
Shaun Gray
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Troy Daniel Perry
For Bail Application
George Mervyn Walsh
For Bail Consent
Jarod Leigh Cashion
Krishna Kali Brown
Rebecca Dorothy Baker
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9.30 am
Ian Jones v David Fish
Mention – Question of liability
10 am
Martin Joseph Kent v Rebecca Sandra Reid
Directions hearing
11 am by video link to RPC2
Nathan Dobson v State of Tasmania
Notice of appeal (directions hearing)
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
12:00p.m.
For Application to Withdraw as Surety
Sammual Clinton Wilmot
For Application to Vary Bail
Stephen James Williams
2:15p.m.
For Sentence via Video Link
Shannon Louise Brown
Tuesday, 28 April 2020
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
3:00p.m.
For Mention via Video Link
Luke Anthony Shaw
BURNIE
NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE
Details
- Case
- [2020] TASSCCourtlist 327
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a case was heard on April 28, 2020, involving several defendants, including Sean William McKenzie, Duc Van Nguyen, Zack David Devine, and others. The nature of the dispute was primarily criminal in nature, with hearings for bail applications, bail consent, directions, and sentence hearings. The matter was presided over by Justice Brett in Hobart and Justice Pearce in Launceston, with some hearings conducted via video link due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The defendants faced various charges, ranging from assault to drug-related offences.
The legal issues before the court involved the granting and variation of bail, the management of criminal cases, and the application of the Bail Act 1977 (Tas). The court had to consider the principles of justice and the public interest in determining whether bail should be granted or varied, as well as ensuring that the rights of the accused were protected. The court also had to address the procedural aspects of managing criminal cases during the pandemic, such as conducting hearings via video link to maintain social distancing.
Justice Brett and Justice Pearce carefully considered the evidence presented and the submissions made by both the prosecution and the defence. The court weighed the factors relevant to bail, such as the severity of the offence, the risk of reoffending, and the likelihood of the accused appearing in court. In some instances, the court granted bail with conditions, while in others, it varied or refused bail. The court also issued directions for the management of ongoing criminal cases, ensuring that the defendants' rights were upheld while balancing the need to protect the public.
The final orders varied depending on the specific case. Some defendants were granted bail with or without conditions, while others had their bail varied or refused. The court issued directions for the continuation of the criminal proceedings, including scheduling further hearings and setting timelines. The orders reflected the court's consideration of the evidence, submissions, and the principles of justice.
The legal issues before the court involved the granting and variation of bail, the management of criminal cases, and the application of the Bail Act 1977 (Tas). The court had to consider the principles of justice and the public interest in determining whether bail should be granted or varied, as well as ensuring that the rights of the accused were protected. The court also had to address the procedural aspects of managing criminal cases during the pandemic, such as conducting hearings via video link to maintain social distancing.
Justice Brett and Justice Pearce carefully considered the evidence presented and the submissions made by both the prosecution and the defence. The court weighed the factors relevant to bail, such as the severity of the offence, the risk of reoffending, and the likelihood of the accused appearing in court. In some instances, the court granted bail with conditions, while in others, it varied or refused bail. The court also issued directions for the management of ongoing criminal cases, ensuring that the defendants' rights were upheld while balancing the need to protect the public.
The final orders varied depending on the specific case. Some defendants were granted bail with or without conditions, while others had their bail varied or refused. The court issued directions for the continuation of the criminal proceedings, including scheduling further hearings and setting timelines. The orders reflected the court's consideration of the evidence, submissions, and the principles of justice.
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.