SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR MONDAY, 30 JUNE 2014
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
MJA
Beau Vaughan Plowman
For Trial
JLF
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Application
TJP
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Mention (via video link to Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie)
Bobby Joe Mogford
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
CKT
For Mention
BAS
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
4:00 p.m.
Criminal Jurisdiction
For Directions via video-link from Court 1, Supreme Court, Launceston
Nicholas Charles Pitt
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
10:00 a.m.
For Judgment
Legal Profession Board of Tasmania
v
XYZ
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Quarmby
v
Harper
Quarmby
v
Oakley
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice Pearce
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial (Part-Heard)
Brady Allan Pyke
For Mention
Christopher James Barron
For Trial
Adrian John Pryer
4:00pm For Directions via video-link to Court 2, Supreme Court, Hobart
Nicholas Charles Pitt
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Mention (via video link to Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie)
Bobby Joe Mogford
______________________________________________________
(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:
- AGLC
- Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 30 June 2014 [2014] TASSCCourtlist 124
- Case
- [2014] TASSCCourtlist 124
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The court assessed the evidence and submissions presented by both parties. It considered the applicable legal standards and the precedents set by similar cases. Associate Justice Holt examined the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence to decide whether the respondent had indeed engaged in professional misconduct. The court ultimately found that the allegations were substantiated and that the respondent's conduct warranted disciplinary action. The judgment detailed the specific breaches, the reasons for the findings, and the appropriate sanctions to be imposed.
In light of the findings, the court ordered that XYZ be suspended from practising as a legal practitioner for a specified period. The respondent was also required to attend a professional conduct course and comply with other conditions aimed at ensuring future compliance with professional standards. The judgment was delivered in writing and provided a comprehensive explanation of the court's reasoning and the basis for the sanctions imposed. This decision serves as a clear reminder of the high standards expected of legal professionals in Tasmania.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.