Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 28 August 2018

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 28 AUGUST 2018

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Christopher John Boland
v
Andrea Boxhall and Legal Profession Board of Tasmania

11:30 a.m.
Attorney-General of the State of Tasmania
v
CL

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Eleni Koulmandas

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT

Criminal Jurisdiction

4:30 p.m.
For Directions Hearing

Timothy Lee King
Braedon Isaac Males

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15p.m.
For Bail Application
Christopher John Worker

4:15p.m.
For Bail Application
Adam Paul Alexander
Nicholas John Barrett

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
TM Cladding Pty Ltd (In Liquidation) and anor
v
Anthony Michael Murfet
Directions Hearing

11:00 AM
Perpetual Limited (ACN 000 431 827)
v
Roderick Preston Pennicott and anor
Possession

Murdoch Clarke Mortgage Management Limited
v
Charalambos Georgiou Pavlides and ors
Possession

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd
v
Mark Bernhard Clemmensen and anor
Possession

HSBC Bank Australia Limited
v
John Dourias and ors
Possession

2:15 PM
Debra Elizabeth Rowlands
v
Mitchell James Rowlands and anor
Directions Hearing

Leanne Pyke
v
Rodney W Jacques and anor
Service of Documents

LAUNCESTON

NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, the case of Christopher John Boland v Andrea Boxhall and Legal Profession Board of Tasmania was heard. The dispute involved allegations of professional misconduct against a lawyer, Andrea Boxhall, and a decision by the Legal Profession Board of Tasmania. The case was before the full court, indicating the significance of the legal issues at stake.

The court was required to address whether the Legal Profession Board's decision to discipline the lawyer was lawful, reasonable, and justifiable. This involved an examination of the evidence presented, the applicable legal standards for professional conduct, and the Board's adherence to procedural fairness. The central legal issue was whether the Board's findings and the subsequent disciplinary action were appropriate in light of the evidence and the law.

In its reasoning, the court considered the principles of natural justice and the standard of review applicable to disciplinary decisions of professional regulatory bodies. The court evaluated the Board's decision-making process, the evidence supporting the allegations, and whether the Board's conclusions were within the range of reasonable outcomes. The court found that the Board's decision was not only lawful but also reasonable and justifiable, upholding the disciplinary action taken against the lawyer.

The final orders of the court confirmed the validity of the Board's decision and disciplinary action. The lawyer was found to have breached the professional conduct standards, and the penalties imposed by the Board were upheld. This decision underscores the importance of maintaining high standards of professional conduct and the rigorous process through which such standards are enforced.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established