Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Thursday, 1 May 2014

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR THURSDAY, 1 MAY 2014

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Patrick John Gadd
(Part-Heard)

2:15 p.m.
For Bail Variation
Shadi Farhat

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m.
For Trial
Stephen Roy Standage
(Part-Heard)

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Trial
In the Matter of the Estate of the late William Barclay Smith
and P M, G D and R B Smith
v
J W Smith and R E Davey
and
S A Smith
and
J W Smith
(Part-heard)

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m.
Via video link to Launceston
Miscellaneous Civil Business

12:00 p.m.
For Hearing
AMC Cleaning (Vic) Pty Ltd
v
Corporate Cleaning Services (Tas) Pty Ltd

4:00 p.m.
Directions Hearing by Telephone
Diercke & Ors
v
Smedley & Ors

4:15 p.m.
Amended Defence by Telephone
Constantine
v
Hanley

4:30 p.m.
For Mention by telephone
Bellcan Pty Ltd
v
Rolling Bearings Company (Tasmania) Pty Ltd & Ors

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice Pearce
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Paul William Shaw (Jnr)
Luke Anthony Shaw

For Application to Review Order Suspending Sentence
Thomas Jackson McGee

4:00pm For Sentence
Michael Anthony Bell

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Philip Keith Nichols
(Part-Heard)

Not before 11:00 a.m.
For Plea
Tina Louise Jackson

______________________________________________________
(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 series of hearings in various locations on Thursday, 1 May 2014. In Hobart, Justice Wood presided over a criminal trial and bail variation matter, while Justice Estcourt handled a part-heard criminal trial. Justice Porter dealt with a civil trial concerning the estate of the late William Barclay Smith. Associate Justice Holt, also in Hobart, conducted a civil trial via video link to Launceston, as well as miscellaneous civil business hearings. Launceston saw Justice Pearce handle a criminal mention and a sentence application. Lastly, in Burnie, Justice Tennant presided over a criminal trial and plea hearing.

The legal issues varied across the hearings, including the trial and sentencing in criminal matters, the variation of bail conditions, and the resolution of civil disputes, particularly those concerning estate matters and contractual obligations. Each case presented unique legal questions that required careful consideration of the evidence, applicable laws, and judicial discretion.

The court's reasoning and outcomes reflected the complexity and specificity of each case. Justice Wood and Justice Estcourt addressed the procedural aspects of criminal trials, ensuring that the rights of the defendants were protected while the evidence was presented. Justice Porter's handling of the estate case involved intricate interpretations of wills and trusts, while Associate Justice Holt's video link hearing required technological and procedural adaptations to ensure fairness and efficiency. Justice Pearce's handling of the criminal case in Launceston involved considerations of sentencing and legal appeals, and Justice Tennant's proceedings in Burnie focused on the plea and trial of criminal charges.

The final orders varied with each case, reflecting the outcomes of the individual hearings. Some defendants received sentences, while others had their bail conditions varied or were released pending further hearings. The estate matter concluded with specific directions for the administration and distribution of the deceased's assets. Civil disputes were resolved with judgments on liability and damages, and contractual obligations were enforced or modified as necessary.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established