Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 23 October 2013 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 23 OCTOBER 2013

HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Trial
Tu Ai Lin
(Part-Heard)

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m. via video link from Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
For Plea
DSG

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
1:45 p.m. via video link from Court 1, Launceston
For Sentence
David John Charles King

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention
Jamie Reginald Hall

Voir Dire
Stephen Roy Standage

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Decision
Michael Neil Shea
v
Sergeant Richard Lane

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m. via video link to Launceston
Amend Statement of Claim
Roberts Limited
v
Frifth-Brown & Anor

2:15 p.m.
Set down for Trial
Masters
v
Dobson Mitchell & Allport & Anor

4:00 p.m.
Particulars via telephone
Constantine & Ors
v
Hanley

LAUNCESTON

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice Wood
Criminal Jurisdiction
10.00am For Trial (Part-Heard)
Stephen John Peters

1.45pm For Sentence by Video-Link to Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
David John Charles King

4.15pm For Mention by Video-Link to Hobart Remand Centre
MDM
SWDM

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice Pearce
Civil Jurisdiction
10.00am For Trial (Part-Heard)
Loree Ramone Arabena v. Marcus Todman

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Porter
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00 a.m.
For Mention via video-link
Adrian Wayne Smillie
Jacqueline Anne Welsh
Justin Roy John Roughley

For Mention
Daniel Reginald Clarke
Corey Bamber Brooke
David Clinton Johnson
ZRP
Jason Theo MacMillan
Ashlea Maree Rigby
Alan Robert Arkinstall

For Plea
Cameron Lewis Rawlinson

Not before 10:30 a.m.
For Trial (Part-heard)
JWB

4:00 p.m.
For Sentence via video-link
Christopher Luke Finn

4:15 p.m.
For Plea via video-link to Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
DSG

______________________________________________________
(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, on 23 October 2013, handled a variety of criminal and civil cases. In the criminal jurisdiction, several defendants faced trials and sentencing. Tu Ai Lin was part-heard in the Hobart court, while David John Charles King was scheduled for sentencing via video link from Launceston. Jamie Reginald Hall was listed for a voir dire, and Stephen Roy Standage was to face a trial in Hobart. The civil jurisdiction had Michael Neil Sheav's case against Sergeant Richard Lane being heard, where the court was to decide on an amendment to the statement of claim. Another case, Roberts Limited v Frifth-Brown & Anor, was set down for trial, and particulars were to be provided via telephone in Constantine & Ors v Hanley. In Launceston, Stephen John Peters faced a trial (part-heard), and David John Charles King was to be mentioned via video link. Loree Ramone Arabena was to face Marcus Todman in trial (part-heard). In Burnie, Adrian Wayne Smillie, Jacqueline Anne Welsh, and others were to be mentioned via video link, and Cameron Lewis Rawlinson was to be sentenced via video link to Hobart.

The legal issues before the court ranged from the admissibility of evidence in voir dire proceedings to the interpretation and application of civil law in relation to amendments to statements of claim and the resolution of disputes in both criminal and civil matters. The court was required to determine the guilt or innocence of defendants in criminal cases, the appropriate sentences for those found guilty, and the outcomes of civil disputes, including the validity of claims and the admissibility of evidence. The court's decisions would hinge on the interpretation of statutory provisions, the application of legal principles to the facts of each case, and the procedural rules governing the court's operations.

Justice Tennent, presiding over the Hobart court, along with other justices in Launceston and Burnie, provided detailed reasoning for their decisions. In the criminal cases, the court considered the evidence presented, the legal arguments from both prosecution and defense, and the applicable laws to determine guilt or innocence and the appropriate sentence. In the civil cases, the court examined the amendments to statements of claim, the admissibility of evidence, and the merits of the claims to make decisions that would guide the progression of the trials. The court's outcomes were based on a thorough analysis of the law and the facts of each case, ensuring that justice was served in accordance with legal principles and procedures.

The final orders of the court would reflect the outcomes of the cases heard, including sentences for those found guilty in criminal matters and judgments in civil disputes. The court's decisions would be communicated to the parties involved, and any appeals or further legal actions would be guided by the court's rulings. The Supreme Court of Tasmania's handling of these cases demonstrated its commitment to the administration of justice, ensuring that both criminal and civil matters were addressed with due process and fairness.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 23 October 2013

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established