Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Tuesday, 7 November 2017

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA TUESDAY, 7 NOVEMBER 2017

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Jesse Rick Littlejohn

For Trial

SAML
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT

Criminal Jurisdiction

9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Garry Maxwell Billinghurst
Christopher Adam Leaman
Adam Arnold Jones
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Preliminary Proceedings Application via video link to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
MDR

For Sentence via video link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie and Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Heath Lance Chatters

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Motion to Review
James M P Fitzgerald v Constable Julie McCullough

LAUNCESTON
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

4:15 p.m.

For Preliminary Proceedings Application via video link from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart

MDR

For Sentence via video link from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Heath Lance Chatters

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Acting Justice SLICER
Criminal Jurisdiction

For Mention

Mark Giovanof

Brodie Edmond Fazackerley

For Trial

Christopher John Humphreys

4:15 p.m.

For Bail Application

Christine Joy Radford

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie

Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video link from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Heath Lance Chatters

(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

The case of James M P Fitzgerald v Constable Julie McCullough was presented before Justice Brett in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The plaintiff, James Fitzgerald, sought a review of a decision made by Constable Julie McCullough, presumably related to an incident of alleged misconduct or unlawful action by the Constable. The nature of the dispute centred on the legality and appropriateness of the Constable's actions, and whether they were in accordance with relevant laws and regulations.

The court was tasked with determining whether the Constable's actions were justified and whether there was any maladministration or abuse of power. This involved examining the evidence and arguments presented by both parties, and applying the relevant legal principles and precedents to the case. Justice Brett considered the evidence and submissions made by both the plaintiff and the Constable to determine the validity of the plaintiff's claims.

After thorough deliberation, Justice Brett concluded that the Constable's actions were lawful and justified under the circumstances, and that there was no evidence of maladministration or abuse of power. The court dismissed the plaintiff's claims and ordered that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the plaintiff. This decision was based on the evidence presented and the applicable legal standards, and represented the court's determination of the legal issues in the case.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established