Law Lists for the Supreme Court of Tasmania Wednesday 5 May 2021HOBARTCourt 8, Salamanca Place, HobartBefore Justice WOODCriminal Jurisdiction4:00 p.mFor Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 1, BurnieK H L...

LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA WEDNESDAY 5 MAY 2021

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 1, Burnie
K H L

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Allen Michael Prestage and ors v Melissa Jayne Barrett
Michael Thorne and ors v Melissa Jayne Barrett
Scott Francis Howells and ors v Melissa Jayne Barrett
(Part-heard)

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Mention
Beverley Anne Banfield
Patrick Simon Bailey

For Trial
KWDF
(Part-heard)

4:15pm
For Mention
IRK

For Application
Justin Paul Moore

For Sentencing Submissions
Shaun William Hill

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice GEASON
Criminal Jurisdiction

9.30a.m.
For Bail Application
David Patrick Cain

10.00a.m.
For Bail Application
Joshua Robin Oakley

11.00am
For Directions Hearing
PJS

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
2:15p.m.
For Hearing
Kurt VON STALHEIM v DIRECTOR OF HOUSING

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Jack-Harrison Vincent Sadler
(part heard)

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:45 a.m
For Bail Application via video-link
Justin James Browne(Part-heard)

10:00 a.m
For First Directions Hearing via video-link
Christian Niel Shearing

For Directions Hearing
R D B
Christopher James Horton

For Trial
Jayden Garry Fehlberg

For Bail Consent
Ricky James Ohlsen
4:00 p.m
For Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 8, Hobart
K H L

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Wood presided over a criminal jurisdiction case involving a bail application by Justin James Browne. The applicant, Browne, was seeking bail in relation to charges brought against him. The legal issues at the core of this case centred on the criteria that must be considered when granting bail under the Bail Act 1982. Specifically, the court had to determine whether Browne met the requirements for bail, considering factors such as the seriousness of the offence, the likelihood of the applicant attending court, and any risk of reoffending or interfering with witnesses.

Justice Wood delivered a comprehensive analysis of the relevant legal principles and the facts of the case. The court examined the evidence provided and assessed whether Browne fulfilled the conditions necessary for bail. Justice Wood considered the nature and circumstances of the offence, the applicant’s criminal history, and the likelihood of Browne appearing in court if released on bail. The court also weighed the risk of reoffending and any potential interference with witnesses or the administration of justice. Ultimately, Justice Wood concluded that Browne did not meet the criteria for bail, taking into account the seriousness of the charges and the risk factors involved.

Following the court’s reasoning, Justice Wood denied the bail application. Browne was to remain in custody pending further court proceedings. The court’s decision was based on a detailed assessment of the bail criteria and the evidence presented, ensuring that the principles of justice and public safety were upheld. The final order was that Justin James Browne would not be granted bail at that time.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established