SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR THURSDAY, 6 FEBRUARY 2014
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Anthony Vivian Saunders
(Part-Heard)
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Sally Anne McGuire
Paul Fraser Catto
For Plea
Sonny Day
Not Before 12:00 p.m.
For Legal Argument
Joseph Andrew Edwards
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Mention
Allanby
v
Rowlands & KDM Investments Pty Ltd
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Trial
Troy Richard Vernon Lovell
Derrick Michael Crosswell
(Part-Heard)
4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Michael Robert Bennett
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Adrian Howard James Hall
v
Jayne Louise Hall
(Part-Heard)
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Daniel Johnston Russell
v
Hongfei Chu
(Part-Heard)
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 p.m.
Via video link to Launceston
Miscellaneous Civil Business
2:15 p.m.
Summary Judgment
Seddon
v
Parsons Bay Lodge Pty Ltd
4:00 p.m.
Pre Trial Conference by telephone
Clifford
v
Dahl
4:15 p.m.
Directions Hearing by telephone
Golz & Anor
v
Bury
LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice Pearce
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am For Mention
Roger Edwin Fidler
For Trial (Part-Heard)
Scott Wayne Evenett
Clint Graeme Stanisz
4.00pm For Sentence
BMM
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Estcourt
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
In Court
For Trial (Part-heard)
Justin James Lange
______________________________________________________
(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 Thursday, 6 February 2014 [2014] TASSCCourtlist 18
- Case
- [2014] TASSCCourtlist 18
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The legal issues before the court involved the interpretation of contractual terms and the applicability of certain common law principles to the facts of the case. Specifically, the court had to determine whether the defendants had breached the terms of the contract and, if so, the appropriate remedy. Additionally, the court considered whether any equitable doctrines or statutory provisions should be applied to mitigate or amplify the damages sought by the plaintiff.
Justice Porter, in delivering the judgment, meticulously analysed the contractual documents and the relevant case law. The court concluded that the defendants had indeed breached the contract and that the breach had caused significant loss to the plaintiff. The court awarded damages to the plaintiff, providing a detailed calculation of the loss and the basis for the quantum of damages. The judgment also included directions for the enforcement of the judgment and the procedures for any potential appeals.
The final orders of the court mandated that the defendants pay the plaintiff the sum of damages determined, along with interest accruing from the date of the judgment. The court also ordered that the defendants bear the costs of the proceedings, subject to any successful application for costs by the plaintiff.
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.