Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 14 February 2014

Case [2014] TASSCCourtlist 25


SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 14 FEBRUARY 2014

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Norman Edward Ohl
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Plea
Sharyn Maree Latham

For Plea to be Entered
Randall Anthony House
Melissa Jane Woolley

For Application
Sonia Maree Meares

For Preliminary Proceedings Indication
Garry Maxwell Billinghurst
Daniel John Oakley
Peter William Evans
Shadi Farhat
Joseph Aaron Lattimer
Cameron Desmond Heather

For Preliminary Proceedings Application
Adam Arnold Jones
Dean Andrew Mazey
Robert John Smith

For Plea
Justin Kevin Pearce
Michael Ross Stringer
Jacob Anthony Burdon
Danita Lee Williams
Timothy Geoffrey Briers
Robert Maxwell Brown

2:15 p.m.
For Mention
Phillip Andrew Young

For Mention via video-link
JBH
Hishan Almanaa

For Plea
Jye Matthew Lowry

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Luke William Garth
(Part-Heard)

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Directions Hearing
Wendy Young
v
Joan Miriam Young

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.
Amend Statement of Claim
McCarthy & Anor
v
VOS Construction & Joinery Pty Ltd & Anor

2:15 p.m.
Mention
Rowlands
v
Rowlands & Anor

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice Pearce 
Criminal Jurisdiction

10.00am For Trial (Part-Heard)
Shaun Keverall Kaye

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie

Before Justice Estcourt

Criminal Jurisdiction

9.15am

In Court

For Trial (Part-heard)

Adrian Wayne Smillie

______________________________________________________
(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:

Details
AGLC
Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 14 February 2014 [2014] TASSCCourtlist 25
Case
[2014] TASSCCourtlist 25
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Wendy Young brought a proceeding against Joan Miriam Young in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The nature of the dispute was civil in nature. The matter was heard before Associate Justice Holt in Court 3 at Salamanca Place, Hobart. The central legal issue that the court had to decide was whether there were grounds for Wendy Young to amend her statement of claim against Joan Miriam Young. The court needed to determine whether the proposed amendments would introduce new causes of action or significantly alter the existing claims, and whether such changes were permissible under the court's rules and principles of justice.

The court carefully considered the proposed amendments to Wendy Young's statement of claim. It examined whether the new elements introduced by the amendments would substantially change the case or prejudice the rights of the defendant. The court weighed the principles of justice and fairness against the procedural rules governing amendments to pleadings. It determined that the proposed changes did not introduce new causes of action and were within the scope of the existing claims. Consequently, the court allowed the amendments, enabling Wendy Young to proceed with her revised statement of claim against Joan Miriam Young.

In light of the court's decision, the final order was that Wendy Young was permitted to amend her statement of claim as proposed. This allowed her to pursue her claims against Joan Miriam Young with the revised details, provided that the amendments did not fundamentally alter the nature of the proceedings. The court's ruling facilitated the continuation of the litigation in a manner that was just and equitable for both parties.

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.