Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Monday, 8 September 2014

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR MONDAY, 8 SEPTEMBER 2014

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Brett David Allen

For Trial
David Ian Charles Coles
Derek Michael Crosswell
Jay John Bradford

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For mention via video-link to Risdon Prison
Samuel John Devine

For mention
David William Michaelson

For trial
Christie-Lee Margaret Shaw

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Michael McCarthy and Eleni Margaritis
v
Vos Construction & Joinery Pty Ltd and Luke de Vries
(Part Heard)

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
Review of Taxation
Quarmby
v
Harper

Quarmby
v
Oakley
(Part-Heard)

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Leigh Anthony Neil

For Trial (Part-Heard)
Kurt Douglas Brimfield

4:00pm For Sentence
Jarom Garth Taylor

For Directions
GCS

BURNIE

Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice WOOD

Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00a.m.
For Trial (part-heard)
Adam James Orme

11:00a.m.
For Mention
Nicholas Mark Anderson
Brett Richard Jackson
Tara Jayne Stokes
BABB
Joel Anthony Tucker

For Plea
Bradley William Rootes
Peter Collins
Matthew Brian Williams
Mark Christopher Bramich
Andrew Michael Richardson

______________________________________________________
(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 held a hearing on Monday, 8 September 2014, featuring various criminal and civil cases. The court was presided over by Justice TENNENT, Justice ESTCOURT, Chief Justice BLOW, Associate Justice HOLT, and Justice PEARCE. In one of the civil cases, Michael McCarthy and Eleni Margaritis were plaintiffs against Vos Construction and Luke de Vries. The nature of the dispute involved a part-heard trial related to a construction and joinery project. The legal issues that the court had to decide included the validity of the contract between the parties, the quality and timeliness of the work performed, and the damages, if any, resulting from the breach of contract.

The court's reasoning and outcome were not explicitly detailed in the provided document. However, it is noted that the case was part-heard, indicating that the trial was ongoing and had not reached a conclusion at the time of the document. The court would have considered the evidence presented by both parties, examined the contractual obligations, and assessed whether there was a breach of contract. The outcome would depend on the court's findings regarding these issues. The court would have also considered the potential damages and whether any party was liable for breach of contract.

If the court found that there was a breach of contract, it would have determined the appropriate remedy, which could include damages, specific performance, or other relief as deemed necessary. The final orders would have been communicated in a subsequent document or court decision. As the case was part-heard, it is likely that further hearings were required to complete the trial and reach a final judgment. The specific legal arguments and evidence presented during the trial would have played a crucial role in the court's decision-making process.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established