Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 29 June 2016 Summary

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 29 JUNE 2016

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Adrian Eugene Kelleher
(Part-Heard)

10:00 a.m.
For Plea
Mark William Wall

In Court as In Chambers
11:00 a.m.
For Bail Application
Joshua Plummer
NWH

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Plea
Aaron John Salvesen
Ricky John Pearce

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT

Civil Jurisdiction

In Court as in Chambers

9:30 a.m.

For Decision via Video-Link to

Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie

Professor Nadira Pardo

Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency & Ors

In Court as in Chambers

10:00 a.m.

For Hearing

A Legal Practitioner

Andrea Boxall and the Legal Profession Board of Tasmania

In Court

4:15 p.m.

For Mention

Nathan Grant Chatters

Sergeant Gary Lusted & Ors

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial (Part Heard)
Shaun Andrew Blake
Martin John Mace

4:00pm For Plea
HLC

To Follow
For Sentencing Submissions
Gregory John Medcraft

4:15pm
In Court as In Chambers
For Bail Application

Allan James Blackberry

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Mention
Dean Troy Wylie

2:15pm
For Sentence
Chad Richard Talbott

4:00pm
For Sentence
Daniel James Evans

To Follow
For Further Sentencing Submissions
Timothy Peter Hingston

(Note: Initials are used where publication of a person's name is not permitted by law.)

MAGISTRATES COURT LISTS available at:

Email subscriptions to the law lists of other courts can be requested at:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a range of criminal and civil matters on Wednesday, 29 June 2016. The criminal division in Hobart handled pleas, bail applications, and a part-heard trial. Notable cases included a plea from Mark William Wall and a bail application from Joshua Plummer. The civil division in Hobart also handled matters, such as a decision via video-link to Burnie regarding Professor Nadira Pardov and the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency. Further south in Launceston, Chief Justice Blow presided over a part-heard trial involving Shaun Andrew Blake and Martin John Mace, as well as plea hearings and sentencing submissions.

The legal issues addressed in these proceedings varied widely, encompassing bail applications, plea hearings, trial proceedings, and regulatory decisions. In criminal cases, the court had to decide on the appropriate bail conditions, the admissibility of evidence, and the guilt or innocence of the accused. In the civil cases, issues such as professional misconduct and regulatory compliance were central. The court's role was to interpret and apply the relevant laws to the specific facts of each case, ensuring that justice was served in accordance with the legal framework.

The court's reasoning and outcomes reflected a careful consideration of the evidence presented, the applicable legal principles, and the specific circumstances of each case. For instance, in the criminal cases, the court assessed the likelihood of the accused reoffending, the seriousness of the offence, and the protection of the community. In the civil cases, the focus was on whether the respondent had violated professional standards and the appropriate sanctions or regulatory measures. The court's decisions were based on a thorough analysis of the evidence and legal arguments, aiming to achieve fair and just outcomes in line with the law.

The final orders included bail decisions, pleas of guilty or not guilty, and various sentencing outcomes. In the criminal cases, the court either granted or denied bail, accepted pleas, and imposed sentences. In the civil cases, the court made decisions on regulatory compliance and professional discipline, issuing orders that could include fines, suspensions, or other sanctions. These outcomes were communicated to the parties involved and documented in the court's records.

Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 29 June 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established