LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA, WEDNESDAY 6 OCTOBER 2021
HOBART
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video-link to Court 1, Alexander Street, BurnieJAR
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Trial
MJD
4.15 p.m.
For SentenceAnthony Craig Dillon &
Bradley James Fahey
4.15 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Emiel Everadus Van Diepen
4.15 p.m.
For Bail Consent
Maurice Webb
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart Before Acting Justice MARSHALL10:00 a.m.For ApplicationSteven Pitman, surety of Lisa Lyn Hardwood
11:00 a.m.For Bail ApplicationHayden Joel Larner
12:00 noonFor Application to Vary BailAnthony Ray Laoumtzis
For Bail ApplicationFrancesco Ciampa
2:00 p.m.For Bail ApplicationDaniel James Hanham
4:15 p.m.For Application for Compensation via video-link to Court 1, Alexander Street, BurnieRe: Samuel John Burrows
LAUNCESTON
NO LAW LIST FOR LAUNCESTON
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pmFor Sentence via video-link to Court 2, Salamanca Place, HobartJAR
Court 8, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
4:15 p.m.
For Application for Compensation via video-link to Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Re: Samuel John Burrows
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 335
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard a case involving Anthony Craig Dillon and Bradley James Fahey on 6 October 2021. The parties appeared before Justice Pearce in Hobart for sentencing, via video-link to Court 1 in Burnie. The nature of the dispute was sentencing for criminal offences committed by the two defendants. The court was required to decide the appropriate sentences for the crimes committed by Dillon and Fahey, considering factors such as the severity of the offences, the circumstances, and any mitigating or aggravating factors.
The legal issues before the court included the assessment of the appropriate penalties for the criminal activities of the defendants. The court had to consider the principles of sentencing under the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas), including the need to punish and deter the defendants and others, and to rehabilitate the offenders. Justice Pearce also needed to evaluate the evidence presented regarding the circumstances of the offences and the characters of the defendants. The court's reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the submissions from both the prosecution and the defence, along with the legal framework governing sentencing.
Justice Pearce delivered the sentences, taking into account the submissions from both parties and the statutory guidelines. The court found that the crimes warranted custodial sentences, with specific terms determined based on the individual circumstances of each defendant. The final orders included specific prison terms for both Dillon and Fahey, reflecting the court's determination of the appropriate penalties for their respective offences.
The legal issues before the court included the assessment of the appropriate penalties for the criminal activities of the defendants. The court had to consider the principles of sentencing under the Sentencing Act 1997 (Tas), including the need to punish and deter the defendants and others, and to rehabilitate the offenders. Justice Pearce also needed to evaluate the evidence presented regarding the circumstances of the offences and the characters of the defendants. The court's reasoning involved a detailed analysis of the submissions from both the prosecution and the defence, along with the legal framework governing sentencing.
Justice Pearce delivered the sentences, taking into account the submissions from both parties and the statutory guidelines. The court found that the crimes warranted custodial sentences, with specific terms determined based on the individual circumstances of each defendant. The final orders included specific prison terms for both Dillon and Fahey, reflecting the court's determination of the appropriate penalties for their respective offences.
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.