Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 20 October 2014 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR MONDAY, 20 OCTOBER 2014

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Tanya Maree Devine
Adrian Raymond Nattey

For Trial
Jamie Peter Smart
Rhys Louis Gardner
(Part-Heard)

4:15 p.m.
For Mention
Dwight Stanley Murtagh

For Facts and Sentence
Anthony Robert Hawkins

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent
Jason Noel Rowe

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD

Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence via video link to Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Hayden Murray Saunders

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Mention
Frederick Edward Petrasek
A Witness
A Witness
A Witness

For Trial
Trent McSpadden
Natalie Jean Millhouse
(Part-Heard)

4:15p.m.
For Sentence
MJM

JPG

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.

For Hearing
Saunders and Ward Pty Ltd
v
Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Equity Australia Corporation Pty Ltd
v
Mark Richerdson

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Robin O’Hair as personal representative of the Estate of Daphne O’Hair
v
AMACA Pty Ltd

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Alissa Margaret Moore
Mark Andrew Jenkins

To Follow For Trial
GCS

4:00pm For Sentence
PLT
DPG

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction
4.15 pm
For Sentence (via video link from Court 8, Hobart)
Hayden Murray Saunders

______________________________________________________
(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 matter of Saunders and Ward Pty Ltd v Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania on 20 October 2014. The case was heard in Civil Jurisdiction before Justice Wood. The nature of the dispute involved a challenge by Saunders and Ward Pty Ltd to a decision made by the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal.

The legal issues that the court was required to decide related to the validity of the Tribunal's decision and the scope of its powers in making that decision. The plaintiff argued that the Tribunal had acted beyond its jurisdiction and had made an error of law in reaching its decision. The defendant, on the other hand, maintained that the Tribunal's decision was valid and within its jurisdiction.

The court found in favour of the plaintiff, holding that the Tribunal had indeed acted beyond its jurisdiction and had made an error of law. The court found that the Tribunal had failed to properly consider relevant evidence and had placed undue weight on irrelevant factors. The court also found that the Tribunal had not adequately explained its reasoning, which was a requirement under the relevant legislation. The court therefore quashed the Tribunal's decision and remitted the matter back to the Tribunal for reconsideration.

No final orders were made in this case as the matter was remitted back to the Tribunal for reconsideration. However, the plaintiff was successful in having the Tribunal's decision quashed and will now have an opportunity to present its case afresh before the Tribunal. The outcome of this case highlights the importance of proper consideration and explanation of evidence and reasoning by decision-makers, particularly in the context of administrative law.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 20 October 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established