Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 31 March 2020

Case [2020] TASSCCourtlist 123


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 31 MARCH 2020

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:45 a.m.
For Plea and Sentencing Submissions
via video link to Court 2, Cameron Street,
Launceston and Risdon Prison Complex
Meraki Sharka James Mansell

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link
H J R
To follow
For Plea via video-link
Dylan James Shaw

3:30 p.m.
For Bail Application via video-link
Zoe Leanne Whiley

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30a.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Heath Lance Chatters

10:00a.m.
For Bail Consent
Nathan Lee Weschler
Beau Wayne Kelly
Martin Vivien Sinclair
Stuart Ernest Sinclair

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15p.m.
For Bail Application via video link to Court 7,
Salamanca Place, Hobart 
Shannon Lee Burridge
Andrew James Bell
Jack Willem Harris
Kye John Edward Charles Louney

For Directions Hearing via video link to Court 7,
Salamanca Place, Hobart 
Victor Kent Park

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Sentence via video link to Court 2,
Magistrates Court, Devonport and video link
to Ron Barwick Prison
Jason Peter Earle

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
12:00 midday
Borg Manufacturing Pty Limited v
John Van’t Sant
Extend Caveat

2:15 pm
ZAB v JWM
Directions Hearing / Interlocutory Application

Terrence Royden Russell v
Christopher Douglas Russell
Directions hearing/Appoint administrator
Paul Glover as Trustee of the Glover Family Trust
t/a Glover Electric v Rossglengary Pty Ltd
Set down for trial

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:45 a.m.
For Plea and Sentencing Submissions via video link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
and Risdon Prison Complex
Meraki Sharka James Mansell

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video-link
H J R

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Plea via Video Link
Carly Elizabeth Lyon

2:15p.m.
For Bail Application via Video Link
Pushba Chhetri

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Plea via video-link
Dylan James Shaw

3:30 p.m.
For Bail Application via video-link
Zoe Leanne Whiley

Details
AGLC
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 31 March 2020 [2020] TASSCCourtlist 123
Case
[2020] TASSCCourtlist 123
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in the Supreme Court of Tasmania case are Borg Manufacturing Pty Limited and John Van’t Sant. The nature of the dispute is a legal action taken by Borg Manufacturing against John Van’t Sant. The court involved is the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The legal action taken by Borg Manufacturing against John Van’t Sant is an extend caveat.

The legal issues the court was required to decide include whether the caveat should be extended and if so, for how long. The court was also required to determine whether the caveat was necessary and justified in the circumstances. The court had to consider the merits of the case and the potential impact of the caveat on the parties involved.

The court's reasoning and outcome was that the caveat was extended for a period of six months. The court found that the caveat was necessary and justified in the circumstances, and that it was in the best interests of all parties involved to grant the extension. The court considered the evidence presented by both parties and weighed the merits of the case before arriving at its decision.

The final orders of the court were that the caveat was extended for a period of six months, and that the parties were required to continue to abide by the terms of the caveat during this period. The court also ordered that any further applications for extension or variation of the caveat would be subject to the court's approval.

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.