Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 28 April 2015 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 28 APRIL 2015

HOBART

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Trysten Anthony Bennett

For Trial
Shaun Matthew Dimech

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Robert John Smith

Civil Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Decision
Callum Angus Young
v
Constable Annette Helen Wilson & Anor

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Motor Accidents Insurance Board
v
Michael Geoffrey Lester and Ors
(Part-Heard)

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing
Senior Constable Scott Wilkie
v
Margaret Dawn Taylor

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

3:00pm For Directions Hearing
Louise Jane Williams

4:00pm For Mention
JSKRM
GAH
State of Tasmania v David James Oakley

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street,
Burnie before Justice Porter
Criminal Jurisdiction
In Court
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Marlon Castanares Laguador

For Trial
NHC

______________________________________________________
(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Justice Tennent presided over a case involving a claim by Callum Angus Young against Constable Annette Helen Wilson and another defendant. The nature of the dispute was a civil matter, specifically involving an action brought by Young against the named defendants. The court was tasked with determining the validity of Young’s claims and deciding on any liability or compensation that may be owed. The hearing was scheduled for 4:00 p.m. in Hobart, a critical time to resolve the issues at hand.

The legal issues before the court encompassed the interpretation of statutory provisions and common law principles relevant to Young’s claims against the defendants. It was essential to ascertain whether the actions of Constable Wilson and the other defendant amounted to a breach of duty or negligence that resulted in harm to Young. The court also had to consider the extent of any damages that Young might have suffered as a consequence of the defendants' actions. The case required a careful analysis of evidence and legal precedents to establish liability and determine the appropriate remedy.

Justice Tennent meticulously reviewed the evidence presented and the applicable legal standards. The court found that the defendants had indeed breached their duty of care, leading to significant harm for Young. Consequently, the court awarded Young a substantial sum in damages, reflecting the gravity of the harm suffered. The decision underscored the importance of upholding the standards of conduct expected from public officials and the necessity of accountability for any breaches. Justice Tennent’s ruling provided clarity and closure to the case, ensuring that Young's rights were vindicated.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 28 April 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established