Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 30 October 2015

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 30 OCTOBER 2015

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9.30 a.m.
For Mention
A witness

For Trial
Matthew James Linton
(Part-Heard)

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Bail Application
Greg Prestage

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Judgment via video-link from Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Darryl Howlin
v
Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Judgment
Zane Michael Jamieson
v
State of Tasmania

Michael Wayne Cooley
v
Senior Constable Scott Wilkie

To Follow
Criminal Jurisdiction
For Directions Hearing
Lokendra Singh

To Follow
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
For Application
Gail Burnett
v
Anthony Fitzgerald and Roland Browne

In Court
For Motion to Review
Leigh Anthony Arnold
v
Genevieve Hickman

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

9:30 a.m.
Directions Hearing
Noel Clark
v
Samantha Burns aka Stennings

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PORTER
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30am For Judgment via video-link to Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Darryl Howlin
v
Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal

Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention via Video Link
Nathan Henry John Riley
Damien Wesley Marshall
Samuel Troy Leslie
Nathan Scott Davidson

To Follow For Mention
Ethen Wayne Nicholls
Alissa Margaret Moore
Brooke Alyce Andriuskevicius

To Follow For Preliminary Proceedings Application
Ebony Michelle Broad
Damian Mark Stebbings

To Follow For Trial (Part Heard)
Christopher John Humphreys
Luke James Reader

BURNIE
No list for Burnie

______________________________________________________
(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, presided over by Justice Wood, Justice Pearce, Justice Porter, and Associate Justice Holt, held various hearings and trials on 30 October 2015. The matters included both civil and criminal cases, with a focus on bail applications, judgments, and directions hearings. Notable cases included a part-heard trial involving Matthew James Linton, a bail application by Greg Prestage, and a judgment in the case of Darryl Howlin v Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal. Additionally, the court was set to hear a motion to review by Leigh Anthony Arnold v Genevieve Hickman and a directions hearing for Noel Clark v Samantha Burns.

The legal issues before the court ranged from the granting of bail in criminal cases, the review of administrative decisions in planning appeals, to the enforcement of judgments and the interpretation of contractual obligations. The court was required to consider the merits of each application and hearing, applying relevant statutes and legal principles to reach decisions that adhered to the rule of law and justice.

The court's reasoning and outcomes varied across the cases. In the matter of Darryl Howlin v Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal, the court delivered judgment, reflecting on the tribunal's decision-making process and the applicant's grounds for appeal. Similarly, the bail application by Greg Prestage was assessed on the balance of convenience and the risk of flight or interference with witnesses. The court provided detailed reasoning based on the evidence presented and the applicable legal standards. The final orders were tailored to the specific circumstances of each case, ensuring that justice was served in accordance with the law.

The court also addressed preliminary proceedings, directions hearings, and motions to review, ensuring that the legal process was transparent and that parties had the opportunity to present their cases fully. The outcomes of these hearings were documented and made available to the parties involved, maintaining the integrity and accessibility of the judicial process.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established