Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 12 April 2017

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 12 APRIL 2017

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Wayne Gregory Pattison
v
State of Tasmania

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
DJK
(Part-Heard)

For Sentence
Zachariah Angus Denwer-Ripper

2:15 p.m.
For Plea
Aron Paul Thogersen

For Bail Application
James Fitzgerald

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
3:45 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Andrew Gray
v
Senior Sergeant Luke Moore

In Court as In Chambers
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Andrew John McCormack and Ors
v
Lihua Qin and Ors

In Court
4:45 p.m.
For Mention
Senior Sergeant John Parker
v
Christopher Mark Shaw

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction

2:15 p.m.
For Sentence by Video Link to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Mention by Telephone
D.T.K Logging Pty Ltd
v
Arthur J Gallagher & Co (Aus) Limited
formally t/a OAMPS Insurance Brokers Ltd

4:15 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
Apple Air Pty Ltd and anor
v
Zbigniew Wilczynski

LAUNCESTON
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
3:45pm For Directions Hearing via video link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Andrew Gray v Senior Sergeant Luke Moore

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction

2:15pm For Sentence by Video Link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
SG

BURNIE

No list for Burnie.

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 an appeal by Wayne Gregory Pattison against the State of Tasmania. Pattison was challenging a decision made by a lower court. The Court of Criminal Appeal presided over the case, with Justice TENNENT leading the proceedings. The central legal issue in this appeal was whether the lower court had correctly applied the law in its decision, specifically regarding the interpretation of certain legal principles and their application to the facts of the case. The court had to determine if the decision was legally sound and whether any errors were made that could have influenced the outcome.

In its reasoning, the Court of Criminal Appeal meticulously reviewed the lower court's judgment, examining the application of the relevant legal principles. The court assessed whether the evidence presented was sufficient and whether the legal standards were properly applied. The appeal hinged on identifying any potential misinterpretations or misapplications of the law. Ultimately, the Court of Criminal Appeal found that the lower court had not erred in its application of the law and upheld the original decision. The appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the lower court remained in place.

The final orders of the Court of Criminal Appeal confirmed the dismissal of the appeal. Wayne Gregory Pattison's challenge to the lower court's decision was unsuccessful, and the original judgment was affirmed. This outcome underscored the importance of correctly applying legal principles and ensuring that all evidence is adequately considered in criminal cases. The decision also served as a reminder of the appellate court's role in reviewing and upholding the legal integrity of lower court judgments.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established