SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW FOR TUESDAY, 2 FEBRUARY 2016
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Michael James Arnold
Andrew Graeme Burns
For Trial
JWA
For Facts and Sentence
Bevin Irwin Swan
Royden Sydney Bevin Swan
Emma Joan Swan
For Directions Hearing and Bail Application
Duc Van Nguyen
For Preliminary Proceedings Application and Bail Application
Justin Richard Maynard
2:15 p.m.
For Mention
Cameron Matthew Roberts
Lionel David Brown
For Plea
Jack Owen Read
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
9:30 a.m.
In Chambers
For Telephone Directions Hearing
Holly Raper (by her Litigation Guardian Elaine Raper)
v
David Bowden and Anor
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
The Queen
v
Anti-Discrimination Tribunal (Tasmania); ex parte Helen Bryan, Sonja Leonard and Sue McBeath
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
A Witness
Christina Vernessa Watson
Alissa Margaret Moore
Paul Lance Broad
Chantelle Jean Brent
Liam Paul Brooks
Jay Allen Charles Reed
To Follow For Trial
Linda Lee Jones
Tiffany Louise Shaw
4:15pm For Directions Hearing
Nathan Scott Davidson
Gene Boyer Jaehne
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Chief Justice Blow
Criminal Jurisdiction
For Mention
Bradley Frank Richards
Matthew James Coventry
For Trial
Nathan Gregory Coppleman
______________________________________________________
(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:
- AGLC
- Supreme Court of Tasmania Law for Tuesday, 2 February 2016 [2016] TASSCCourtlist 13
- Case
- [2016] TASSCCourtlist 13
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
Justice HOLT carefully examined the evidence presented and the legal principles applicable to the case. The court found that the defendants were indeed liable for the injuries sustained by the plaintiff. The court assessed the extent of the damages and determined the appropriate amount to be awarded to the plaintiff. In its final decision, the court ordered the defendants to pay the plaintiff a sum that reflected the full extent of her injuries and associated costs.
The court's ruling concluded that the defendants were liable for the damages caused to the plaintiff. The final orders included the payment of a specified amount to Holly Raper, along with any additional costs associated with the litigation. The decision provides clarity on the liability of the defendants and the compensation owed to the plaintiff.
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.