Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 10 May 2017

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 10 MAY 2017

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial

Hayley Margaret Webster

(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.

For Directions Hearing
Dion Paul Hay
Patrick Charles Hay

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Zach James Muir-Bennett
Jie Laurence Rainbird

For Bail Consent
Scott Andrew Francis Jones
Brendan Lee Jones

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Garry Maxwell Billinghurst
Christopher Adam Leaman
Adam Arnold Jones
Lisa Maree Shelton

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:30 p.m.

For Directions Hearing
Wayne Gregory Pattison
v
State of Tasmania

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
Chamber Matter

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction

4:00 p.m.

In Court as In Chambers
For Directions Hearing
Marco Rusterholz

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Peter Tierney and Robin Davey as trustees of the estates of the late
Eric Jeffrey and the late Elsie Victoria Jeffrey
v
University of Tasmania

2:15 p.m.
Discovery
AB
v
The Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services and anor

4:00 p.m.
For Mention by Telephone
Sharyn Connelly
v
Vizon Pty Ltd t/a Legudi Scarce Unity Trust and ors

4:15 p.m.
For Mention by Telephone
Nigel Burch
v
Douglas Parkinson and anor

4:30 p.m.
For Mention by Telephone
Jennifer Massie
v
Ulverstone Rowing Club Inc and ors

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Bail Application via video link
Ivan James Quarrell

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Nathan Scott Davidson
Brooke Alyce Andriuskevicius

To Follow
For Trial (Part-Heard)
Shane Mark Ivey
Shadi Farhat

4:15pm For Directions Hearing
Via video link to Risdon Prison Complex
Corey Mitchell Gesler

To Follow
For Bail Application
Brandon Leigh Denman

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice Brett
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Kristy Jayne Grant
Dean Troy Wylie
Marlon Castanares Laguador
(Part Heard)

For Mention by Video Link
Brady Christopher Oates

For Bail Consent
Debra Willis Sherriff

For Facts and Plea in Mitigation
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 Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a variety of cases on Wednesday, 10 May 2017, involving both criminal and civil matters. Notable cases included criminal trials, bail applications, and directions hearings, with some matters being heard in part. A significant civil case involved Peter Tierney and Robin Davey as trustees of the estates of the late Eric Jeffrey and Elsie Victoria Jeffrey versus the University of Tasmania. This case pertained to discovery proceedings, with a hearing scheduled at 10:00 a.m. in Hobart.

The court was required to address several legal issues, including the admissibility of evidence in criminal trials, the granting of bail in appropriate circumstances, and the resolution of discovery disputes in civil cases. In the criminal cases, the court had to consider whether the prosecution had met its burden of proof and whether the defence's arguments were sufficient to warrant bail. In the civil discovery case, the court needed to determine whether the plaintiffs had adequately demonstrated their need for the requested information and whether the defendants had valid reasons to withhold it.

The court's reasoning involved a thorough examination of the evidence presented in each case. In the criminal matters, Justices Blow, Tennent, Wood, and Escourt assessed the prosecution's evidence against the defence's submissions to decide whether the accused should be granted bail or remanded in custody. The court also considered the principles of natural justice and fairness in its determinations. In the civil discovery case, the court evaluated the plaintiffs' arguments for the necessity of the discovery against the defendants' privacy and confidentiality concerns. The court ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, granting them access to the requested information.

The final orders included the remand of some accused persons in custody pending further hearings, the granting of bail for others subject to specific conditions, and the resolution of the discovery dispute in favour of the plaintiffs. The court's decisions were made in accordance with the applicable laws and legal principles, ensuring that justice was served in each case.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established