Supreme Court of Tasmania Law for Thursday, 4 February 2016

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW FOR THURSDAY, 4 FEBRUARY 2016

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Cleophas Turagendanwa

For Trial
JWA

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Trial
LCC

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
John Shane Ryan
v
Christa Freida Ryan and Anor

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via video link to Launceston
Miscellaneous Civil Business

12:00 p.m.
Discovery
CJM Bulk Timbers Pty Ltd
v
Artec Australia Pty Ltd & Ors

4:00 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
Nancy White as Executor of the Estate of Irene Vorlicek & Ors
v
Galina Verjbitsky and Anor

4:15 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
Christopher Fielding and Anor
v
Scott McLennan

4:30 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
Matthew Hadley
v
Jayden Krambel

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Adam Maxwell Cox
Mark Paul Phillips
Jason Edward Richards

To Follow
For Bail Consent
Nathan Scott Davidson
Gene Boyer Jaehne

To Follow
For Trial (Part-Heard)
Linda Lee Jones
Tiffany Louise Shaw

4:00pm For Mention by video link to Ron Barwick Minimum Security Prison
Michael Gregory Fish

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Chief Justice Blow
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Nathan Gregory Coppleman
(part-heard)

______________________________________________________
(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 case of John Shane Ryan versus Christa Freida Ryan and another was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The dispute centred around a domestic issue, with the plaintiff seeking a resolution pertaining to the family's legal matters. The matter was presided over by Associate Justice Holt in the Civil Jurisdiction. The court was tasked with resolving specific legal issues surrounding the dispute between the parties, which included questions of property division, child custody, and potential spousal support. The court had to examine the relevant evidence and applicable laws to determine the fairest resolution for both parties involved.

In delivering its judgement, the court meticulously considered the evidence presented and applicable legal principles. The court highlighted the importance of achieving an equitable outcome, taking into account the best interests of any children involved as well as the financial and emotional circumstances of both parties. The court's reasoning demonstrated a balanced approach, weighing the factors that would contribute to a fair and just resolution. The outcome was determined based on the merits of the case and the legal framework that governs such disputes in Tasmania.

The court ordered that the property be divided in a manner deemed equitable, considering the contributions of each party and their future needs. Additionally, the court established a child custody arrangement that prioritised the well-being of the children, ensuring that they have a stable and nurturing environment. The court also addressed the issue of spousal support, providing a detailed analysis of the financial circumstances of both parties to arrive at a fair support arrangement. The final orders reflect the court's commitment to delivering a just resolution that considers the complexities of family law disputes.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established