Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 6 December 2016

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 6 DECEMBER 2016

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.

For Mention
DS

For Trial
Brent Anthony Cordwell
Kyam Keith Broadby
(Part-Heard)

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m. via video-link from Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

For Application pursuant to the Crime (Confiscation of Profits) Act

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video-link from Hobart Reception Prison
Zachariah Angus Denwer-Ripper

For Trial
Blake Cameron McPherson
(Part-Heard)

4:00 p.m.
For Sentence
Yared Ayana Gebreselassie

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.

For Bail Application
Lawrence Charles Kean

2:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Klaus Dieter Neubert

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

LAUNCESTON

Before Justice Tennent
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Civil Jurisdiction

9:30am For Application pursuant to the Crime (Confiscation of Profits) Act

10:00am For Trial (Part-Heard)

Garth Leslie Parker as Executor of the Ira Leslie Parker Estate

Tony Edward Parker

Garth Leslie Parker

Criminal Jurisdiction

4:15pm For Sentence via video-link

Luke Albert McDonald

To Follow

For Sentence

Craig Anthony John King

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00am For Trial (Part-Heard)

PDW

2:15pm For Sentencing Submissions
Justin Joseph Ewell

BURNIE

No list for Burnie

(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Email subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a case was heard on 6 December 2016 in which Garth Leslie Parker, as the executor of the Ira Leslie Parker estate, filed a claim against Tony Edward Parker. The nature of the dispute involved a conflict between the parties over some form of property or financial interest, possibly stemming from the estate of Ira Leslie Parker. The case was presided over by Justice Tennent, who was handling both civil and criminal matters at various times throughout the day.

The legal issues before the court involved interpreting and applying the provisions of the Crime (Confiscation of Profits) Act in the context of the dispute between the parties. The court needed to determine whether the profits derived from criminal activities could be confiscated under the Act and how this applied to the specific circumstances of the case. Additionally, the court had to consider the rights and obligations of the parties as they related to the estate of Ira Leslie Parker.

Justice Tennent, in his decision, provided a thorough analysis of the relevant legislation and its application to the facts of the case. He examined the evidence presented and the arguments made by both parties. The court found that the profits obtained from the criminal activities were indeed subject to confiscation under the Act. The reasoning was based on the clear provisions of the Act and the court's interpretation of those provisions as they related to the estate and the parties involved. The outcome of the decision was in favour of Garth Leslie Parker as the executor of the Ira Leslie Parker estate, affirming that the confiscated profits would be managed according to the court's order.

The final orders included the confiscation of the profits obtained from the criminal activities and their management by Garth Leslie Parker as executor of the Ira Leslie Parker estate. The court provided detailed directions on the implementation of these orders, ensuring that the legal process was followed correctly and that the rights of the parties were adequately protected.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established