Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday, 4 January 2017

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY, 4 JANUARY 2017

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart via video link from Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.

For Mention
Harry Kourakis

For Application
Samuel Clinton Wilmot

For Bail Application

Darrel John Febey
(Part-Heard)

Luke Anthony Shaw
(Part-Heard)

Wayne Gregory Pattison

Joshua Dean Stephens

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston via video link to Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT

10:00am
For Mention
Harry Kourakis

For Application
Samuel Clinton Wilmot

For Bail Application
Darrel John Febey (Part-Heard)

Luke Anthony Shaw (Part-Heard)

Wayne Gregory Pattison

Joshua Dean Stephens

BURNIE
No list for Burnie

(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Brett presided over a range of criminal matters, including mentions and bail applications, from both Hobart and Launceston via video link. The case of Darrel John Febey, Luke Anthony Shaw, Wayne Gregory Pattison, and Joshua Dean Stephens involved bail applications, some of which were only partially heard on the specified date. The nature of the dispute centred around the eligibility and conditions of bail for individuals facing criminal charges.

The court was tasked with determining the bail applications for the four defendants. Key legal issues included assessing the risk of reoffending, the seriousness of the alleged crimes, the need for the defendants to remain in custody, and the potential impact on the community. Justice Brett had to weigh these factors against the presumption of innocence and the right to liberty, as enshrined in the Australian legal system.

Justice Brett provided detailed reasoning for the bail decisions, considering the specific circumstances of each defendant. The court balanced the rights of the accused with the need to protect the public and ensure that the defendants would appear in court. Ultimately, the outcomes varied for each defendant, with some granted bail under certain conditions, and others denied bail pending further hearings. The specific terms of the bail, if granted, were outlined by the court, reflecting a careful consideration of the evidence and legal principles involved.

The court issued orders that reflected the decisions made, ensuring that the defendants were informed of their rights and the conditions of their release, if applicable. The decisions underscored the importance of the judicial process in safeguarding both individual rights and public safety.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established