Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 23 September 2020

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 23 SEPTEMBER 2020

HOBART

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Application
Adrian Harris

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m
For Voir DireM T S
(Part-heard)For Bail Consent
Brian Graham Dean-Gordon

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Johnny David Jones

For Trial
Jarod Lee Kringle
(Part-heard)

2:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Amy Kerewin Radburn
(Part-heard)

4:00 p.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
A E

Civil Jurisdiction
4:30 p.m.
For Application by Audio-Visual Link
Allen Michael Prestage v Melissa Jayne Barrett and Hamish Robinson
Michael Thorne v Melissa Jayne Barrett and Hamish Robinson
Scott Francis Howells v Melissa Jayne Barrett and Hamish Robinson

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15am
For Decision
State of Tasmania
v
Teresa Ann Pilling

10:00am
For Hearing via audio visual link
Hansen Yuncken Pty Ltd
v
Parliament Square Hobart Landowner Pty Ltd

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Legal Argument
Justin Richard Maynard

4:15p.m.
For Mention via Video Link
Dillon John Cruse

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention
Daniel James Crisp

For Trial
Wayne Keith Herlihy

BURNIE
NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Melissa Jayne Barrett, Hamish Robinson, and Allen Michael Prestage, Michael Thorne, and Scott Francis Howells were involved in a civil dispute which was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The nature of the dispute was not detailed in the provided case list, but it involved claims against Barrett and Robinson. The case was presided over by Justice Brett in the Civil Jurisdiction. The legal issues that the court needed to decide were related to the claims made by Prestage, Thorne, and Howells against Barrett and Robinson. The specifics of these issues were not outlined in the provided case list, but it can be inferred that the court needed to determine the validity and merits of the claims made by the plaintiffs against the defendants.
The court's reasoning and outcome in this case were not detailed in the provided case list. However, it is clear that the case was presided over by Justice Brett and that it involved claims against Barrett and Robinson. The final orders of the court were also not provided in the case list, but it can be assumed that the court would have made a decision based on the evidence and arguments presented by the parties involved in the dispute. The outcome of the case would have been communicated to the parties and their legal representatives in due course.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established