Law Lists For the Supreme Court Of Tasmania Tuesday, 30 April 2019 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 30 APRIL 2019

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
NVL
EB

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice ESTCOURT

Criminal Jurisdiction
9:45 a.m.
For Mention
Rodney Gene Crosswell
Garry Scott Sullivan

10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
AHJH

For Trial
Peter Glenn Howlett

4:00 p.m.
For Sentence
LD

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention
CJR
A Witness on Final Notice

To Follow
For Trial
Justin Andrew Leary

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial
Brodie Lee Clarke

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Darren Ward Gale

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
NVL
EB

For Bail Application via video link
Larissa Ann Martin

(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:

Details

AGLC: Law Lists For the Supreme Court Of Tasmania Tuesday, 30 April 2019 [2019] TASSCCourtlist 89
Case: [2019] TASSCCourtlist 89
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a case involving Rodney Gene Crosswell and Garry Scott Sullivan was scheduled for a directions hearing. The nature of the dispute appears to be criminal in nature, though the specific allegations or charges are not detailed in the extract. The hearing was to take place in Court 7 at Salamanca Place, Hobart, before Justice Wood. The case was set for a directions hearing, which indicates that the court would be addressing procedural or administrative issues rather than substantive legal questions. This type of hearing is typically used to manage the progression of the case, ensuring that all parties are aware of the upcoming steps and deadlines.

The legal issues before the court in this case would likely revolve around the procedural aspects of the criminal proceedings against Crosswell and Sullivan. These could include matters such as the scheduling of further hearings, the admissibility of evidence, and any other logistical or administrative concerns that need to be resolved before the case can proceed to trial. The court's role in this hearing would be to ensure that the process is fair and that both parties have an opportunity to present their cases effectively.

Justice Wood, presiding over the hearing, would have considered the submissions from both parties and any relevant legal principles or precedents. The outcome of the hearing would depend on the specific issues raised and the arguments presented by the parties. The court may have made decisions regarding the timing of further hearings, the exchange of evidence, or other procedural matters necessary for the case to move forward. The final orders from the court would outline the next steps and any conditions or requirements that must be met by the parties in preparation for the trial.

Orders