Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 28 September 2021hobart

Case [2021] TASSCCourtlist 324


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 28 SEPTEMBER 2021

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Phillip Mark Dare
(part-heard)

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Judgment via video-link to PWR, Cameron Street, Launceston
Kurt Von Stalheim
v
Anti-Discrimination Tribunal

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice Brett
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15p.m.
For Application
Joshua Ali Khan

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice MARTIN
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Barbara Anne Etter
v
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania & Coates

Barbara Anne Etter
v
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania

Legal Profession Board of Tasmania
v
Barbara Anne Etter

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00p.m.
For Sentence
Justin David Radcliffe

Court
3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:30a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Bruno ROMANELLI v Tasmanian Health Service

For Directions Hearing
Alana Jean Myler NATHAN v Stephen Michael CLARKE and anor

11:00a.m.
For R414 Directions Hearing
Maria MAHONEY v Glen Thomas Christopher MAHONEY

12:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Samantha LOCKLEY v Jie BIRD

Frederick John PFEIFFER v Christopher John CROLE and anor

Helen Marta STAROSTA and anor v Kenneth HANCOCK as Executor of the Estate of Erna Starosta

Carleen Vera HANCOCK v Kenneth HANCOCK as Executor of the Estate of Erna Starosta

For Directions Hearing
2:15p.m. via MS Teams
For Directions Hearing
Ann Marise GARLING v Tony PATINIOTIS

TAF Hobart Pty Ltd v GANDY & ROBERTS PTY LTD and ors

Myer Pty Ltd v J Hutchinson Pty Ltd and ors

E KALIS PROPERTIES PTY LTD and anor v J Hutchinson Pty Ltd and ors

LAUNCESTON

PWR, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Judgment via video-link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Kurt Von Stalheim
v
Anti-Discrimination Tribunal

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30am
For Directions Hearing

Vanessa Dare
Kurt Blake Watts
Nathan Terrence Applebee

For Trial
JAR

4:15pm
For Application
Drew Alexander Jones

Details
AGLC
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 28 September 2021hobart [2021] TASSCCourtlist 324
Case
[2021] TASSCCourtlist 324
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Anti-Discrimination Tribunal was the respondent in a case brought by Kurt Von Stalheim in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. Stalheim sought a judicial review of a decision made by the Tribunal. The case was heard by Justice Brett and a judgment was delivered via video-link from the Hobart court to the PWR court in Launceston. The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal had correctly exercised its discretion in dismissing Stalheim's complaint. The court examined the Tribunal's reasoning and the application of relevant statutes and case law to determine if the decision was lawful, reasonable, and procedurally fair.

In delivering the judgment, Justice Brett assessed the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. The court concluded that the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal had not erred in law or procedure and had properly exercised its discretion. The Tribunal's decision was found to be well-reasoned and based on substantial evidence. Justice Brett found no grounds to interfere with the Tribunal's decision, affirming its validity. Consequently, Stalheim's application for judicial review was dismissed. The court's decision underscored the importance of deference to administrative tribunals in their areas of expertise, provided their decisions are lawful and rational.

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.