Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 20 August 2013 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 20 AUGUST 2013

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Attorney Generals Reference
v
James Philip Wright

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Decision
David John King
Luke William Garth

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
PML

For Application
Dwight Stanley Murtagh

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:30 p.m.
For Sentence by video-link to Supreme Court, Cameron Street, Launceston
Christopher Ernest Denman

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Judgment via video link to Supreme Court Burnie, Court 1
Stephen John Streets
v
Tracey Joanne Lucas

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice Tennent by Video-Link from the Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Criminal Jurisdiction
4.30pm For Sentence
Christopher Ernest Denman

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 the case of Attorney General's Reference v James Philip Wright, where the issue at hand was the validity of a conviction under the Tasmanian Counter-Terrorism Act 2002. The court was required to determine whether the Act, which criminalised the preparation and planning of terrorist acts, was inconsistent with the Commonwealth's Criminal Code Act 1995. The legal issue centred on the constitutional validity of the Tasmanian legislation in light of the Commonwealth's exclusive legislative powers over terrorism offences.

The court examined the relevant sections of both the Tasmanian Counter-Terrorism Act and the Commonwealth's Criminal Code Act, along with the relevant provisions of the Constitution. It considered whether the Tasmanian Act was saved by section 109 of the Constitution, which stipulates that when a state law is inconsistent with a federal law, the federal law prevails. The court also took into account the principles of federalism and the division of powers between the state and federal governments as outlined in the Constitution. The court concluded that the Tasmanian Act was indeed inconsistent with the federal legislation, and therefore, invalid.

In light of the findings, the court ruled that the Tasmanian Counter-Terrorism Act was constitutionally invalid to the extent it conflicted with the Commonwealth's Criminal Code Act. The decision underscored the supremacy of federal law in areas where the Commonwealth has exclusive legislative powers. The court's judgment provided clarity on the constitutional boundaries between state and federal jurisdictions in the context of counter-terrorism legislation. The ruling was expected to have significant implications for the enforcement of counter-terrorism laws in Tasmania and potentially across other states with similar legislation.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 20 August 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established