Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Thursday, 16 July 2015

Case [2015] TASSCCourtlist 146


SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR THURSDAY, 16 JULY 2015

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
10:00 a.m.
For Application via videolink to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Stephen James Williams

For Bail Application
James Duggan
Duncan McPherson

In Chambers
11:30 a.m.
For Directions Hearing by Telephone
Stephen Roy Standage
v
State of Tasmania

12:00 p.m.
For Directions Hearing via videolink to
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Stuart Barry Russell
v
State of Tasmania

In Court as in Chambers
12:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Kathy Devine

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

11:30 a.m. via video link to Launceston
Interpleader Application
Louise Flynn
v
Paul Richardson

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW

Criminal Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
10:00am For Application via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Stephen James Williams

12:00pm For Directions Hearing via video link from
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Stuart Barry Russell v State of Tasmania

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
2.15pm For Sentence
Jay David Blazely
Mitchell Clay Dowling
Matthew James Coventry

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
11:30am For Application via video link from
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Louise Flynn v Paul Leslie Richardson

BURNIE

NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE
______________________________________________________
(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:

Details
AGLC
Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Thursday, 16 July 2015 [2015] TASSCCourtlist 146
Case
[2015] TASSCCourtlist 146
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard several matters on Thursday, 16 July 2015, both in person and via video link. One such matter involved a bail application by Stephen James Williams, heard via video link from Hobart to Launceston. Another matter, a directions hearing for Stuart Barry Russell against the State of Tasmania, was also heard via video link. In Launceston, the court heard a bail application by Kathy Devine, and a civil application by Louise Flynn against Paul Richardson, both via video link to Hobart. The court also heard a sentencing matter for three defendants, Jay David Blazely, Mitchell Clay Dowling, and Matthew James Coventry, in Launceston.

The legal issues before the court included determining whether bail should be granted to the applicants based on the evidence and arguments presented, and whether the proceedings should proceed as directed in the cases involving the State of Tasmania. The court also needed to consider the merits of the civil applications and determine appropriate outcomes.

The court provided its reasoning and outcome for each matter based on the evidence and submissions presented. In the case of the bail applications, the court considered factors such as the seriousness of the alleged offence, the likelihood of the applicant attending court, and any risk to the community. For the directions hearings and civil applications, the court assessed the procedural fairness and the merits of the applications in light of the evidence and legal principles. The final orders of the court were made in accordance with the outcomes of these considerations.

In summary, the Supreme Court of Tasmania handled a variety of matters, both criminal and civil, utilising technology to facilitate hearings across different locations. The court's decisions were based on a careful consideration of the evidence and legal arguments presented.

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.