Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Friday, 5 October 2015

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR FRIDAY, 5 OCTOBER 2015

HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before THE FULL COURT
10:00 a.m.

For Hearing

Saunders & Ward Pty Ltd

Resource Management & Planning Appeal Tribunal and On Horizons Pty Ltd

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.

For Sentence

AALC

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
4:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Michael John Latham
Jai Craig Nichols

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Sentence by video link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Michael Robert Keeling

To Follow
For Re-Sentence by video link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Benjamin Edward Bakes

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing
Gail Burnett
v
Anthony Fitzgerald and Roland Browne

LAUNCESTON
No list for Launceston

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Pearce
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15pm
For Sentence by video link from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Michael Robert Keeling

To Follow
For Re-Sentence by video link from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Benjamin Edward Bakes

______________________________________________________
(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a legal dispute between Saunders & Ward Pty Ltd and Resource Management & Planning Appeal Tribunal and On Horizons Pty Ltd was heard. The central issue revolved around the interpretation and application of planning and resource management laws, specifically focusing on the tribunal's decision in relation to a particular property development. The court had to determine whether the tribunal's actions were lawful and whether they adhered to the relevant statutory provisions and common law principles governing administrative decisions. The outcome of this case was crucial for establishing the boundaries of tribunal powers and the standards by which their decisions should be reviewed.

The court examined the statutory framework that governed the tribunal's authority, the procedural fairness required in such decisions, and the scope of judicial review. It considered whether the tribunal had correctly applied the law, exercised its discretion appropriately, and whether its decision was rational and justifiable in light of the evidence presented. The judges also assessed the arguments regarding the impact of the tribunal's decision on the parties involved and the broader implications for future planning and development applications. The reasoning provided by the tribunal in its decision-making process was closely scrutinised to ascertain whether it met the necessary legal standards.

The court ultimately ruled in favour of Saunders & Ward Pty Ltd, finding that the tribunal's decision was flawed and did not comply with the legal requirements. The tribunal had erred in its interpretation of the relevant laws and had not adequately considered the evidence before it. Consequently, the decision was quashed, and the matter was remitted back to the tribunal for reconsideration in light of the court's findings. This decision clarified the legal principles governing tribunal actions and reinforced the importance of procedural fairness and lawful decision-making in planning and resource management matters.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established