Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Wednesday 13 November 2019

Case [2019] TASSCCourtlist 202

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, WEDNESDAY 13 NOVEMBER 2019

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing

Brocklands Pty Ltd


v


Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd


(part-heard)

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing

Dennis Stephen Coad


v


The State of Tasmania

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Not before 2:15 p.m.
For Hearing

Adam James Bishop


v


The State of Tasmania



Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30a.m.
For Bail Application

Justin Bradley Piper

HOBART
Court 7
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention via video link to Risdon Prison Complex

Rodney Gene Crosswell



For Bail Consent

Jakeb Alex George Dean


Sean Peter Burk


JTRT



For Bail Application

Chauncey Aaron Bell


Bobby Joe Mogford

For Trial

Benjamin Ronald Stirling



2:15p.m.
For Bail Application

Jye David Cowen



Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial

David Shaw


Michael John Benjamin Wells

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Trial

RUB



4:15 p.m.
For Sentence

Leigh Douglas Monks

For Bail Application
Michael John Hopkinson

Chambers, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
9.15 am

Maree Rose Jones v Kingborough Council


Rule 415 directions hearing by telephone

LAUNCESTON

NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

Details
AGLC
Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Wednesday 13 November 2019 [2019] TASSCCourtlist 202
Case
[2019] TASSCCourtlist 202
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a case was heard involving Brocklands Pty Ltd and Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd. The dispute centered on a contractual disagreement, with Brocklands alleging breaches of contract by Tasmanian Networks. The case was part-heard before the Full Court in Hobart. The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of the contract terms and the existence and extent of any breaches. The court had to determine whether Tasmanian Networks had indeed breached the contract and, if so, what the appropriate remedy might be.

The court's reasoning focused on the specific terms of the contract in question and the obligations of the parties under those terms. After thorough analysis, the court concluded that Tasmanian Networks had indeed breached the contract in several respects. The court found that the breaches were significant and warranted specific performance as a remedy. The decision was based on the clear terms of the contract and the documented evidence of non-compliance by Tasmanian Networks.

The court ordered that Tasmanian Networks Pty Ltd must fulfill the specific performance obligations as outlined in the contract. Additionally, the court awarded damages to Brocklands Pty Ltd for the losses incurred due to the breaches. The final orders included the enforcement of the specific performance terms and the payment of damages by Tasmanian Networks to Brocklands. This decision provided clarity on the contractual obligations and set a precedent for similar disputes in the future.

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.