Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 24 March 2015

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 24 MARCH 2015

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
BJC
A Witness

For Trial
Dylan Keith Knight
Brodie Jean Self

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Tanya Maree Silva

For Trial
Denison Ong Chin Jui
Nicholas David McWilliams
Joseph Andrew Edwards
(Part Heard)

4:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Jai Craig Nichols
(Part Heard)

For Plea in Mitigation
Timothy John Best

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
DKM

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Troy Leslie Eirth
v
Geoffrey Arthur Spaulding
(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)
Marco Daniel Rusterholz

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am For Voir Dire (Part Heard)

John Benjamin Adams

Jacquelaine Anne McCullagh

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Decision
Justin Raynor Bott

10:00 a.m.
For Trial (part-heard)
Jamie Laurence Carrick

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence
Daniel Ronald Diamond

______________________________________________________
(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 24 March 2015. Among these cases was Eirth v Spaulding, presided over by Justice ESTCOURT in the Civil Jurisdiction. The nature of the dispute involved Troy Leslie Eirth, who was the plaintiff, and Geoffrey Arthur Spaulding, who was the defendant. The case was part-heard on that day, indicating that it spanned multiple court sessions.

The legal issues the court had to decide involved the merits and specific details of the civil dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant. The nature of the civil case required the court to examine the evidence presented, the applicable laws, and the arguments of both parties to reach a conclusion. The court's task was to determine whether the plaintiff's claims were valid and, if so, to what extent the defendant was liable.

The court's reasoning and outcome, however, are not detailed in the provided excerpt. Given the nature of the document, it likely summarises the court listings without delving into the specifics of each case's resolution. The final orders would have been communicated in subsequent documents or during the next court session. The mention of the case being part-heard indicates that further sessions were scheduled to complete the trial and deliver a final judgment.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established