Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday 12 February 2020

Case [2020] TASSCCourtlist 72


LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY 12 FEBRUARY 2020

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Bilal Moutwari
(Part-heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Damian John Lipscombe
(Part-heard)

For Bail Application
Mitchell Allie

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Darrel George Harington

4:15p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
David William Michaelson

Telephone Directions Hearing in Chambers
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9:40 AM
Dong Jo SHIN  v Yong Tae CHO
Directions hearing by telephone 

Court 3 Salamanca Place Hobart, By Video Link to Cameron Street Launceston
Before Associate Justice HOLT
12:00 Noon
Highview 360 PTY LTD v MEROST PTY LTD
Interim injunction

Court 3 Salamanca Place Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
2:15 PM
Infants Compromise  

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Mention
Katrina Dianne Newitt
Wayne Keith Herlihy

To Follow:
For Trial
Lisa Maree Doolan

4:15p.m.
For Directions Hearing via Video Link
Jake Harley Hattenschwiler

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
3:30p.m.
For Hearing
Troy Wayne Murray
v
State of Tasmania

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Elias Maffeking Kefalianos
(Part-heard)

For Bail Consent
Kurt Douglas Horton

4:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
David Alan Williams

For Plea
Derick Cook

For Bail Consent
Leigh Brian McRedmond

Details
AGLC
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday 12 February 2020 [2020] TASSCCourtlist 72
Case
[2020] TASSCCourtlist 72
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Highview 360 Pty Ltd v Merost Pty Ltd was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania before Associate Justice Holt. The dispute concerned an application for an interim injunction by Highview 360 Pty Ltd against Merost Pty Ltd. The legal issue before the court was whether Highview 360 Pty Ltd had established a prima facie case warranting the grant of an interim injunction.

The court considered the balance of convenience and the irreparable harm that might be suffered by Highview 360 Pty Ltd if the injunction was not granted. The court also examined the likelihood of success on the merits of Highview 360 Pty Ltd's claim. After weighing these factors, Associate Justice Holt determined that the applicant had not demonstrated sufficient grounds for the grant of an interim injunction. Consequently, the application was dismissed.

The final orders of the court were that Highview 360 Pty Ltd's application for an interim injunction against Merost Pty Ltd was dismissed, and no costs were awarded. This decision highlights the stringent criteria that must be met for an interim injunction to be granted in the Supreme Court of Tasmania.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.