Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 13 February 2015

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 13 FEBRUARY 2015

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via Video-Link to Risdon Prison Complex
Andrew Allan Purcell
Nicholas James White

For Mention via Video-Link to Mary Hutchinson Women’s Prison
Desiree Simone Evans

For Mention via Video-Link to Hobart Reception Prison
Brent Michael White

For Mention
Zachary Nathaniel Galpin

For Plea
Stuart William Allen

For Application to Review a Suspended Sentence
Corey Ronald Lomas

10:30 a.m.
For Trial
Rhys Louis Gardner
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
FEP
(Part-Heard)

10:00 a.m.
For Sentencing Submissions
Ornella Mirella Santesso

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m. via video link from Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
For Mention
MCW

For Sentence
Darryl Scott Donohue

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

2:15 p.m.
Set down for Trial
Dyson Corporate Security Pty Ltd (in liquidation)
v
Kerr

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Application
Brent John Bingley
Nathan Scott Davidson
Gene Boyer Jaehne

To Follow For Plea
MDS
Carol Elvie Hinds

To Follow For Trial (Part-Heard)
JAW

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30am For Decision
Sean Gregory Richardson
Damien Wesley Marshall

10:00am for Mention by video link to Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
MCW

To Follow For Sentence by video link to Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Darryl Scott Donohue

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Estcourt
Criminal Jurisdiction
For Mention
9.15am
Thomas Ingram – via video link to Launceston Reception Prison
Corey Stafford
Benjamin Moran
Fernando Mendoca
Justin Bott

To follow
For Trial
KA

______________________________________________________
(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 held a series of hearings across its various locations on Friday, 13 February 2015. In Hobart, Justice Tennent presided over a range of criminal cases including mentions, pleas, and an application to review a suspended sentence. Further, Justice Porter was tasked with a part-heard trial and sentencing submissions in another court. In Launceston, Associate Justice Holt dealt with miscellaneous civil business, including a case set down for trial. Meanwhile, in Burnie, Justice Estcourt handled mentions and trials of various criminal matters. The court's schedule included video links to various prisons to facilitate the participation of defendants who were incarcerated.

The legal issues before the court ranged from the procedural aspects of ongoing criminal cases, such as mentions and pleas, to substantive decisions on sentencing and the review of suspended sentences. The court was also required to manage the logistics of video-linked appearances to ensure defendants could participate in their hearings. Additionally, in the civil arena, the court dealt with the complexities of setting down cases for trial and managing the administrative aspects of a liquidation case.

The reasoning and outcomes of the court's decisions were not detailed in the provided document. The court's primary focus appeared to be on the procedural management of the cases, ensuring that all defendants had the opportunity to be heard, and setting the stage for further substantive hearings where necessary. The outcomes of specific mentions, pleas, and sentencing submissions would have been addressed in the respective cases, but no detailed judgments were provided in the document.

The final orders and detailed judgments would have been recorded in the respective case files and would form the basis of further legal actions and appeals where applicable. The court's role in managing the logistics of video-linked appearances ensured that defendants' rights to a fair hearing were upheld, even when they were unable to be present in person.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established