LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, TUESDAY 31 AUGUST 2021
HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, HobartBefore Justice WOODCriminal Jurisdiction10:00 a.m.For Bail Application
Samuel David William Maple
Aaron Thompson
For Directions Hearing James Stuart Walker
For TrialDaniel Robert Knowles
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00pm
For Directions Hearing via video link from Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
MJD
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.30am
For mention by video-link to Ron Barwick Prison and Risdon Prison Complex
David Hau Moeakiola
Alani Povalu Moeakiola
Ryan Edward Brown
10.40am
For plea
CPDS
11am
For sentence
PJS
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:30a.m.
For Security For Costs
Digga Excavations Pty Ltd v Linear Capital Pty Ltd
For Mention
Darren John COLLINS and anor v DEVONPORT CITY COUNCIL
For Directions Hearing
Natalie Anne PRESHAW v Miroslaw Ryszard KUCHARSKI
For Directions Hearing
John Robert ANDERS v CALVARY HEALTH CARE TASMANIA LIMITED T/as CALVARY HEALTHCARE TASMANIA
12:00p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Faith Evelyn TKALAC v Coroner Simon COOPER
For Directions Hearing
STATE OF TASMANIA v Sarah BOLT, Anti-Discrimination Commissioner
For Directions Hearing
Michele Clare WILSON and anor v Betty Clare NAILER and anor
For Directions Hearing
Sharon Gaye JAMES-WOOD and anor v THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE as Executor of the Estate of David Malcolm Branch and anor
For Directions Hearing
Shelly Diana McINNES v Janet Anne ELDER as Executor of the Will of Margaret Joan Anderson and anor
For Directions Hearing
2:15p.m. via MS Teams
For Hearing
The Estate of the late Robert Allan SMITH
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Mention via video-link to PWR, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Peter Richard Anderson
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
11:00am
For Disputed Facts Hearing
Isaac Jess Hall
4:00pm
For Directions Hearing via video link to Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
MJD
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Directions Hearing
Lee Anthony Shaw v Beverley Joyce Hanlon
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Tyson James Hayes
4:15pm
For Sentencing
Paul Andrew Bellchambers
For Directions Hearing
Shane Robert Reynolds
For Hearing
Thomas Joseph Gardam
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 284
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a bail application concerning Samuel David William Maple. The applicant, Maple, was seeking bail from custody pending the resolution of criminal charges against him. The court presided over by Justice Wood was tasked with determining whether Maple met the criteria for bail under the Bail Act 1982 (Tas).
The legal issues before the court were primarily whether Maple was likely to attend court if granted bail and whether there were any other compelling reasons to refuse bail, such as the seriousness of the offence or the risk of reoffending. The court needed to consider the principles of justice and the potential impact on the community if bail were granted. Justice Wood examined the evidence presented, including Maple's criminal history, the nature of the charges, and any mitigating or aggravating factors.
Justice Wood found that Maple's likelihood of attending court was sufficiently high, given his ties to the community and his cooperation with authorities. However, the court also weighed the potential harm to the community and the risk of reoffending. Ultimately, Justice Wood determined that the interests of justice would be best served by granting bail, subject to strict conditions to ensure Maple's compliance and to mitigate any risk of reoffending. Maple was therefore granted bail pending the outcome of his trial.
The legal issues before the court were primarily whether Maple was likely to attend court if granted bail and whether there were any other compelling reasons to refuse bail, such as the seriousness of the offence or the risk of reoffending. The court needed to consider the principles of justice and the potential impact on the community if bail were granted. Justice Wood examined the evidence presented, including Maple's criminal history, the nature of the charges, and any mitigating or aggravating factors.
Justice Wood found that Maple's likelihood of attending court was sufficiently high, given his ties to the community and his cooperation with authorities. However, the court also weighed the potential harm to the community and the risk of reoffending. Ultimately, Justice Wood determined that the interests of justice would be best served by granting bail, subject to strict conditions to ensure Maple's compliance and to mitigate any risk of reoffending. Maple was therefore granted bail pending the outcome of his trial.
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.