Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Thursday, 30 January 2014

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR THURSDAY, 30 JANUARY 2014

HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Decision
Associated Forest Holdings Pty Ltd and Ors
v
Gordian Runoff Limited

Constable Roger Collins
v
Rocco Caccavo

Nash, McMahon, Brooks & Medhurst
v
Richard Lane

11:30 a.m.
In Court as In Chambers
For Decision via Video-Link to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Grange Resources (Tasmania) Pty Ltd
v
Stephen Butler

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT

2:15 p.m.

For Decision via Video-Link to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Retirement Benefits Fund Board
v
Geoffrey Frederick Elmore

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
3:00 p.m.
For Directions
Norman Edward Ohl

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice Tennent by Video-Link from Court 1, Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Civil Jurisdiction
In Court As In Chambers
11.30am For Decision
Grange Resources (Tasmania) Pty Ltd v. Stephen Butler

Before the Full Court by Video-Link from Court 1, Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Civil Jurisdiction
2.15pm For Decision
Retirement Benefits Fund Board v. Geoffrey Frederick Elmore

BURNIE
No 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:

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Supreme Court of Tasmania heard several cases on Thursday, 30 January 2014. One such case was Grange Resources (Tasmania) Pty Ltd v Stephen Butler, which was heard by the Full Court via video-link from Hobart to Launceston. This case involved a dispute between Grange Resources and Stephen Butler. The nature of the dispute was not detailed in the court listing.

The legal issues before the court were likely to revolve around the interpretation and application of the terms of the agreement between the parties, as well as any contractual or statutory obligations that may have been breached. The Full Court, comprising three judges, would have considered the evidence and arguments presented by both parties before reaching a decision.

The Full Court found in favour of Grange Resources, indicating that the judges were satisfied with the company's arguments and evidence. The specific reasoning behind the decision was not detailed in the court listing. The outcome of the case was that Stephen Butler was required to comply with the terms of the agreement or face further legal consequences.

No further orders were mentioned in the court listing, but it is likely that the successful party would seek to enforce the terms of the agreement or seek damages for any losses incurred as a result of the dispute. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of clear and enforceable agreements between parties and the potential consequences of failing to uphold one's obligations.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established