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:
- AGLC
- Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 11 May 2016 [2016] TASSCCourtlist 93
- Case
- [2016] TASSCCourtlist 93
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
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.
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.