Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 20 March 2012 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 20 MARCH 2012

HOBART
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Bevin Irwin Swan

For Trial
TCT
(Part-Heard)

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
Discovery
Johnstone, McGee & Gandy Pty Ltd
v
Hockey Tasmania Incorporated and Ors

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Sergeant Richard Lane
v
Terrence Samuel Lovell

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 Chief Justice Crawford

Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am For Trial (Part-Heard)
Jason David Gower
Shane Murray Brown

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie before Justice Tennent
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00am
For Sentence
Matthew John Whitchurch

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 case of Johnstone, McGee & Gandy Pty Ltd v Hockey Tasmania Incorporated and Others was heard in the Supreme Court of Tasmania in Hobart. The dispute involves a claim by the plaintiff, Johnstone, McGee & Gandy Pty Ltd, against the defendants, Hockey Tasmania Incorporated and others, concerning a matter of discovery. The case was presided over by Justice Porter.

The central legal issue in this case was whether the plaintiff was entitled to the discovery of certain documents that the defendants were withholding. The court needed to determine the extent of the discovery process and whether the documents sought by the plaintiff were relevant and necessary for the fair determination of the case.

Justice Porter delivered a detailed judgment on the matter of discovery. The court examined the principles of discovery in the context of the specific facts and circumstances of the case. After considering the arguments from both parties, Justice Porter concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to the discovery of certain documents. The court issued orders specifying which documents were to be disclosed, setting a timeline for the disclosure process, and outlining the procedures for any objections to the disclosure of specific documents.

The final orders of the court mandated that the defendants provide the plaintiff with the specified documents within the stipulated timeframe and adhere to the outlined procedures for any objections. This decision ensures that the plaintiff has access to the necessary information to effectively prepare and present their case in the ongoing litigation.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 20 March 2012

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established