Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 11 April 2016 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR MONDAY, 11 APRIL 2016

HOBART
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Mention

John Benjamin Adams

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Jenny Branch-Allen
v
Barry Easther and Lynn Mason
(Part Heard)

LAUNCESTON
No list for Launceston.

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 heard a matter in its criminal jurisdiction on Monday, 11 April 2016. John Benjamin Adams appeared before Justice E StCour in Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart, for a mention. The case likely involved an ongoing criminal proceeding or a matter related to sentencing or appeal, given the mention nature of the court appearance. This suggests that the court was addressing procedural or administrative aspects of the criminal case rather than substantive legal arguments.

The court was tasked with resolving issues related to the procedural handling of the criminal case involving John Benjamin Adams. These issues might include the scheduling of further hearings, the status of the case, or the resolution of any administrative matters that required judicial attention. The court's role was to ensure that the legal process was progressing in accordance with the law and the rights of the defendant were protected.

Justice E StCour, in considering the procedural aspects of the case, likely reviewed the case file, heard submissions from the parties involved, and made determinations regarding the next steps in the criminal proceedings. The court's decision would have been aimed at maintaining the efficiency and fairness of the judicial process. The specific outcome and further instructions given to the parties would have been communicated during the mention.

The final orders would have been communicated by Justice E StCour at the conclusion of the mention, detailing any further court appearances, procedural directives, or other administrative actions required in the case. These orders would have been necessary for the continuation of the criminal proceedings and for ensuring compliance with legal requirements.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 11 April 2016

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established