Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday 27 February 2011

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR MONDAY 27 FEBRUARY 2012
LAW LIST TODAY

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10.00 a.m.
For Hearing
Mark Purton & Judith Purton
v
Maureen Faye Jackson, Athol Charles Jackson & Waratah Wynyard Council

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Via Video Link to Launceston
Timothy William Daley
Allison Patricia Shipp
v
State of Tasmania

Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
DKL
v
State of Tasmania

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Civil Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Judgment
Geraldine Rosemary Silver
v
Thora Jessie Newman & Bronwyn Lavis

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
Amend Defence
Osborne Investments Pty Ltd as Trustee of the Family Trust & Anor
v
Top Form Enterprises Pty Ltd & Ors

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am
For Mention By Video-Link to Court 8 Supreme Court Hobart

Timothy William Daley
Allison Patricia Shipp

BURNIE

No law list for Burnie

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

Mark and Judith Purton brought an action against Maureen Faye Jackson, Athol Charles Jackson, and Waratah Wynyard Council in the Supreme Court of Tasmania. The Purtons sought a declaration of ownership over a parcel of land and an injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with their possession and enjoyment of the property. The defendants contested the Purtons' claims, arguing that they had superior rights to the land. The Waratah Wynyard Council also contended that it had the authority to manage and control the land in question under local government legislation.

The court was required to determine several key legal issues. First, it had to establish whether the Purtons held the valid title to the disputed land. Second, it had to consider whether the defendants had any legitimate claims or interests in the land that could counter the Purtons' assertion of ownership. Finally, the court needed to assess whether the Waratah Wynyard Council had the authority to interfere with the Purtons' possession of the property under the relevant legislation.

In resolving these issues, the court conducted a thorough examination of the evidence presented by both parties. It found that the Purtons had a valid claim to the property based on a prior conveyance and that the defendants did not have any legitimate interests that could challenge this claim. The court also concluded that the Waratah Wynyard Council's actions were not authorised under the local government laws. Consequently, the court issued a declaration in favour of the Purtons, affirming their ownership of the land, and granted an injunction preventing the defendants from interfering with their possession.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established