SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR TUESDAY, 9 APRIL 2013
HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.30 a.m.
For Mention
Adam Paul Alexander
Allan William Jones
CLC
For Application
Stuart Malcolm Allen
For Trial
Meaganne Glover
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00 a.m.
For Trial
Jose Alberto Castaneda
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Decision
Ivan Mercer
v
Allianz Australia Insurance Ltd
For Hearing
Retirement Benefits Fund Board
v
Geoffrey Frederick Elmore
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 EVANS
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am For Mention
Clinton Michael Maher
Cameron James Riley
For Trial
Terence Williams
BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street Burnie before Justice Tennent
Criminal Jurisdiction
10 a.m.
For Mention
Shane Robert Smith
For Plea
Steven Dayle Johnston
For Hearing
Andrew Peter Morton
v
Loretta Ann Brooks
_______________________________________________________
(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:
- AGLC
- Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Tuesday, 9 April 2013 [2013] TASSCCourtlist 53
- Case
- [2013] TASSCCourtlist 53
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The cases presented a range of legal issues, including civil disputes over insurance claims, retirement benefits, and miscellaneous civil matters, alongside criminal proceedings that varied from mentions and applications to full trials. The legal issues ranged from the interpretation of insurance policies and the enforcement of retirement benefit claims to the resolution of criminal charges and the adjudication of pleas.
The court's reasoning and outcomes were not detailed in the law lists. However, the scheduling indicated that the court was prepared to address each case's specific legal issues through hearings, decisions, and trials. The outcomes of these proceedings would depend on the evidence presented and the arguments made by the parties involved.
No final orders were noted in the law lists, as these would depend on the outcomes of the hearings and trials scheduled. The law lists provided a framework for the court's activities, ensuring that each case received due process according to its nature and the legal issues it presented.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.