Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 12 April 2013

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 12 APRIL 2013

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction

10.00 a.m.

For Mention by Video Link to Burnie

Kristy Maree McDermott

For Mention

CJC

Cody Lucas Cowley

DLP

For Trial

Meaganne Glover

(Part Heard)

2.15 p.m.

For Mention

WDG

For Sentence

Zach James Muir-Bennett

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Mention
Sean Patrick Salter
Travis Leigh Frankcombe
Tamara Elizabeth Watts
Adrian David Barwick

For Sentence
Jose Alberto Castaneda

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9.15 a.m.
Via video link to Burnie
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice Evans
Criminal Jurisdiction
9.30am For Trial (Part-Heard)
Emily Jane Thompson

BURNIE
No list for Burnie until further notice

_______________________________________________________
(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 Supreme Court of Tasmania, through its various lists, featured several cases on the 12th of April, 2013. One case of note involved Kristy Maree McDermott, who was scheduled for a mention via video link to Burnie. Another case involved Meaganne Glover, where a part of the trial was heard. Meanwhile, in Court 8, Sean Patrick Salter and Travis Leigh Frankcombe had a mention, along with Tamara Elizabeth Watts and Adrian David Barwick, who were awaiting sentencing. In the civil jurisdiction, a miscellaneous civil business was scheduled via video link to Burnie. These cases illustrate the diversity of legal matters handled by the court on this particular day, ranging from criminal to civil disputes.

The court was tasked with addressing a variety of legal issues, including mentions for individuals awaiting sentencing or trial, and the continuation of trials already in progress. The cases involved in the criminal jurisdiction touched upon various offenses, from serious criminal acts to lesser charges. The miscellaneous civil business case likely involved disputes or applications in the civil sphere, requiring judicial resolution. Each case presented its own set of legal questions, such as the admissibility of evidence, the interpretation of laws, and the application of legal precedents.

The Supreme Court of Tasmania handled the cases with due process, ensuring that each party had the opportunity to present their case. Decisions were made based on the evidence presented and the applicable laws. For instance, in the criminal cases, the court would consider the severity of the offense, the defendant's criminal history, and any mitigating or aggravating factors. In the civil case, the court would focus on the specifics of the civil dispute, such as contract breaches, property issues, or personal injury claims. The outcomes of these cases were determined by the court after careful deliberation and consideration of the legal arguments and evidence.

The final orders of the court would have been documented in the court's records, detailing the specific outcomes for each case. For instance, sentences would have been handed down for those awaiting sentencing, and trials would have progressed or concluded as per the evidence and arguments presented. The court ensured that justice was served in each case, adhering to the legal principles and procedural fairness expected in the Australian judicial system.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established