Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 11 February 2014

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 11 FEBRUARY 2014

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

For Trial
Norman Edward Ohl

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Mention
Stacie Anne Dwyer
Katrina Anne Chatters
Lyn Sticpewich
Anthony Michael Lincoln

For Application for Forfeiture of Recognisance
David Ian Charles Coles

For Directions

Timothy Laurance Rozynski

For Trial

Troy Richard Vernon Lovell
Derrick Michael Crosswell
(Part-Heard)

4.15 p.m.
For Sentence
TAJC

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Luke William Garth

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 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice Pearce
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am For Trial (Part- Heard)
Roger Edwin Fidler

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Estcourt
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 am
In Court
For mention via video link
Elias Maffeking Kefalianos

For backstop
Adam James Orme
For Trial
Adrian Wayne Smillie

______________________________________________________
(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 a variety of cases on 11 February 2014. In Court 7, the case of Norman Edward Ohl was listed for mention. Court 8 was occupied with multiple cases, including a mention for Stacie Anne Dwyer, Katrina Anne Chatters, and Lyn Sticpewich, an application for forfeiture of recognisance by David Ian Charles Coles, directions for Timothy Laurance Rozynski, and the trial of Troy Richard Vernon Lovell and Derrick Michael Crosswell, the latter being part-heard. Court 1 had a trial for Luke William Garth, while Court 2 saw a part-heard trial for Adrian Howard James Hall versus Jayne Louise Hall. Court 3 was allocated for miscellaneous civil business, presided over by Associate Justice Holt.

The legal issues varied across the cases, from the procedural handling of recognisance forfeiture and the continuation of ongoing trials to the mention of new charges and directions for the defence. Each case required the court to address specific legal and procedural concerns pertinent to the stage of the proceedings. For example, the trial of Troy Richard Vernon Lovell and Derrick Michael Crosswell necessitated considerations of evidence admissibility, witness testimonies, and the application of criminal law principles.

Justice Tennent, overseeing the mention for Norman Edward Ohl, provided rulings that adhered to the court's procedural guidelines. Justice Porter managed the multifaceted docket in Court 8, ensuring each case received appropriate judicial attention. In Court 1, Justice Wood handled the trial of Luke William Garth with a focus on the application of substantive criminal law. Chief Justice Blow in Court 2 and Associate Justice Holt in Court 3 managed their respective civil and criminal trials, ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal standards. The Launceston and Burnie courts also saw their own set of hearings, each requiring the respective justices to address local jurisdictional issues and manage the court's workload efficiently.

The outcomes of each case would depend on the specific findings and rulings made by the respective justices. Orders would be made in accordance with the court's determination of the facts and applicable law, ensuring that justice was served in each instance.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established