SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 13 MAY 2016
HOBART
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Nathan Grant Chatters
v
State of Tasmania
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:15 a.m.
For Trial
David Luke Pearson
(Part-Heard)
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Benjamin Angus Shield
In Court as In Chambers
2:15 p.m.
For Bail Application
Stuart Alexander Ferguson
To Follow
In Court
For Mention
Connie Gladys Stephenson
To Follow
In Court as In Chambers
For Bail Application
Kevin Anthony Deakin
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Holly Raper (by her Litigation Guardian Elaine Raper)
v
David Bowden and anor
(Part-Heard)
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via video link to Burnie
Miscellaneous Civil Business
11:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Karen Baker
v
Tasmanian Perpetual Trustees Limited
LAUNCESTON
Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial (Part Heard)
RV Pty Limited v Connector Park
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Shaun Keverall Kaye
2:15pm For Judgment
Senior Sergeant Luke Moore v Taylor Laurelle Radford
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Porter
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial (Part Heard)
Michael Gregory Beechey
Anthony Craig McCulloch
______________________________________________________
(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 Lists for Friday, 13 May 2016 [2016] TASSCCourtlist 95
- Case
- [2016] TASSCCourtlist 95
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court was tasked with determining the rights and obligations of the parties based on the presented evidence and legal arguments. Associate Justice Holt would have considered the relevant laws and precedents to arrive at a decision. The reasoning and outcome of the court's decision were not provided in the listing, and further information would be required to understand the specifics of the court's ruling.
As the case was only partially heard at the time of the listing, a final outcome was not available. The court's decision would likely address the specific legal issues raised by the parties, providing clarity on their respective rights and obligations. Further hearings would be required to complete the trial and reach a final judgment.
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.