Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 11 May 2016

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 11 MAY 2016

HOBART

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00 a.m.

For Trial

David Luke Pearson

(Part-Heard)

4:00 p.m.

For Sentence

Melita Joanne Matepi

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Facts and Plea in Mitigation
NWH

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial

Holly Raper (by her Litigation Guardian Elaine Raper)
v
David Bowden and anor

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
Costs Hearing
Gail Burnett
v
Fitzgerald and Browne

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00am For Trial (Part Heard)
RV Pty Limited v Connector Park

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE

Criminal Jurisdiction

10:00am For Mention
Luke James Reader
Shaun Keverall Kaye
Troy Wayne Murray

4:15pm For Sentence
Adam Jacob Shepherd

BURNIE

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Adrian Wayne Campbell

For Bail Consent
Zoe Lee Griffiths

For Trial

Michael Gregory Beechey
Anthony Craig McCulloch

4:15 p.m.
For Sentence by Video Link
Samuel John Johnson

______________________________________________________
(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 a range of cases on the specified date. One notable case involved a criminal trial where David Luke Pearson was being tried. Another case involved sentencing for Melita Joanne Matepi. In civil matters, a case involving Holly Raper, represented by her litigation guardian Elaine Raper, against David Bowden and another party was set for trial. Further down the state, in Launceston, cases involving RV Pty Limited v Connector Park and a costs hearing between Gail Burnett and Fitzgerald and Browne were scheduled.

The legal issues in these cases varied but included criminal matters such as trials and sentencing, as well as civil disputes involving litigation, trial management, and costs. The court was tasked with ensuring that due process was followed in both criminal and civil proceedings, including the fair presentation of evidence, the application of relevant laws, and the proper administration of justice.

The court's reasoning and outcome were likely detailed in the judgments or orders issued for each case. However, without specific references to the judgments, it is not possible to provide detailed insights into the court's reasoning. Nonetheless, the court would have considered the evidence presented, applicable laws, and legal precedents in reaching its decisions. The outcomes would have reflected the court's interpretation of the facts and the law as they pertained to each case. Final orders would have been made accordingly, addressing the specific issues raised by each party involved in the proceedings.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established