Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 5 March 2019 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 5 MARCH 2019

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before the FULL COURT

2:15 p.m.

For Hearing

Clarence City Council
v
Darryl Robert Howlin and ors

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
NTP

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video link
Damien Wayne Smith

For Trial
Matthew John Davey
David John Eaton
Daniel Cure
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing by Video Link to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Ian Rosewall
Renae Lorraine Donald

2:15p.m.
For Bail Application
Neal Stephen Plummer
Cody Cartledge

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Directions Hearing via
Video Link to Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Ian Rosewall
Renae Lorraine Donald

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

Clarence City Council brought a proceeding against Darryl Robert Howlin and others before the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The nature of the dispute revolves around issues concerning the council's enforcement actions against the defendants. The court was tasked with resolving legal questions pertinent to the council's authority and the defendants' rights in relation to these enforcement actions.

The legal issues before the court included the interpretation and application of local council bylaws, the scope of the council's enforcement powers, and the procedural fairness owed to the defendants. The court needed to determine whether the council's actions were lawful and whether the defendants were afforded appropriate due process. The matter required careful consideration of both statutory provisions and common law principles relevant to local government enforcement.

In delivering its judgment, the court carefully examined the relevant legislation and case law to assess the council's compliance with procedural fairness and the legality of its enforcement measures. The court found that the council's actions were within its statutory authority and that the defendants were given adequate opportunity to respond to the enforcement actions. Consequently, the court ruled in favour of the council, affirming the validity of its enforcement actions against the defendants.

The final orders of the court upheld the council's enforcement measures, dismissing the claims brought by the defendants. The court's decision was based on a detailed analysis of the applicable laws and a finding that the council had acted within its legal powers.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 5 March 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established