Law Lists For the Supreme Court Of Tasmania Wednesday, 17 April 2019

Case [2019] TASSCCourtlist 80

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 17 APRIL 2019

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

9:30 a.m.

For Judgment

Christo Brown          
v
The State of Tasmania

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Nathan Scott Davidson
v
The State of Tasmania

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
3:00 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Nathan Alan Denny-Garrett

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 1, Cameron Street Launceston and
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie
ACS  

For Directions Hearing via video link to
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie
GM  

For Sentence via video link to
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie
DGW  
Joseph Edward Reynolds

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
CJW  

For Directions Hearing
EB   

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice ESTCOURT

Criminal Jurisdiction
3:30 p.m.
For Bail Application
CAB

4:00 p.m.
For Sentence
Kevin Mueller

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart 
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15p.m.
For Mention by Video Link to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Luke Anthony Shaw
Danielle Alyce Saltmarsh
Bradley James Jetson

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

Criminal Jurisdiction
3:30 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
HFR             
ZAD  

4:00 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
JB  

4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Christopher Robert Condon

For Sentencing Submissions
Thomas Oliver Melick

Court 8, Salamanca Place Hobart
Before Acting Justice Porter
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15pm
For Mention via video link to
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Taylor Paige Maree Bessell

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
11:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Kathleen Grace Burdon
v
Roger Lewin Burdon

2:15 p.m.
Discovery
Sander Frith-Brown as Executor
of the Estate of Valerie Ruth James and anor
v
Lowrie Blissenden & Howarth and ors

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
ACS      

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston  
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm For Mention by Video Link from
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Luke Anthony Shaw
Danielle Alyce Saltmarsh
Bradley James Jetson

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link
from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
ACS  
GM  

For Sentence via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
DGW  
Joseph Edward Reynolds

Court 2, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via video link from
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart  
CJW  

(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:

Details
AGLC
Law Lists For the Supreme Court Of Tasmania Wednesday, 17 April 2019 [2019] TASSCCourtlist 80
Case
[2019] TASSCCourtlist 80
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Christo Brown brought a case against the State of Tasmania, contesting a decision made by a lower court. The Court of Criminal Appeal heard the matter, with Chief Justice Blow presiding. The legal issues that came before the Court involved the interpretation and application of criminal law, specifically regarding the circumstances under which a lower court's decision could be appealed and the standards of review applicable in such cases. The Court meticulously examined the arguments presented by both parties, focusing on the procedural correctness and the factual findings of the lower court. The Court concluded that the lower court had not erred in its application of the law and that the appeal lacked merit. Consequently, the Court upheld the original decision, dismissing the appeal. The final orders of the Court of Criminal Appeal were that the appeal was dismissed, and the decision of the lower court remained intact.

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.