Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 26 March 2013 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 26 MARCH 2013

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice EVANS
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Mention
Allan William Jones

In Court as in Chambers

For Bail Variation

Luke William Garth

For Trial
Anthony Douglas Glass
(Part-Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Stephen Roy Standage

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m.
For Application to Discharge Dangerous Criminal Declaration
Ian Robert Smith

Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Hearing
Pamela Freeman
v
Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9.30 a.m.
Miscellaneous Civil Business

LAUNCESTON
No list available at time of publication

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie before Justice Porter
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.

For Investigation into Fitness to Stand Trial
William Colin Drake

2.15 p.m.
For Sentence
Rudolph Stichter

For Plea
Patrick Michael Hennessy

In Court as in Chambers
For Bail Application
Noela Jean Smith

_______________________________________________________
(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 featured several cases on the law lists for Tuesday, 26 March 2013. In Criminal Jurisdiction, there were multiple matters including mentions for bail variations, trial proceedings, and applications related to dangerous criminal declarations. In Civil Jurisdiction, Pamela Freeman was to appear before Associate Justice Holt for a hearing against the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal. This case likely involved an appeal related to resource management or planning, with the tribunal's decision being contested.

The legal issues in these cases varied significantly. In the criminal matters, the court was required to decide on bail variations, fitness to stand trial, and sentencing, among other things. The civil case between Freeman and the tribunal would have involved interpreting the relevant planning laws and determining the validity of the tribunal's decision. Each case presented unique challenges that the court needed to address based on the evidence and arguments presented by the parties involved.

The outcomes of the cases were not detailed in the publication. However, the court would have considered the legal principles and precedents relevant to each case. In criminal cases, considerations would include the accused's rights, the severity of the alleged crime, and public safety. For the civil case, the court would have examined the legal and factual basis of the tribunal's decision and whether it was made in accordance with the law. The final orders in each case would depend on the specific findings and rulings made by the court.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 26 March 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established