Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 29 October 2014 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 29 OCTOBER 2014

HOBART
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Criminal Jurisdiction
9:30 a.m.
For Trial
Jamie Peter Smart
Rhys Louis Gardner
(Part-Heard)

10:00 a.m.
For Bail Consent
Shane Leslie Godfrey
Craig Jeffrey Field

For Facts and Sentence
Vance Roy Lobban

For Facts and Sentence and For Application to Review an Order Suspending Sentence
Tanya Maree Devine

2:15 p.m.
For Facts and Sentence
Jason Charles Dare

4:15 p.m.
Civil Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
For Directions Hearing via Video-Link to Court 1, Supreme Court, Cameron Street, Launceston
Rodney David Synfield and Neil Raymond Graham
v
Senior Sergeant John Parker

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

Gregory Patrick Kotynia-English
(Part Heard)

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:30 a.m.
For Trial
Tye Matthew Curtain
(Part-Heard)

4:15p.m.
For Mention
George Maryon

For Sentence
Trent McSpadden
Natalie Jean Millhouse

In Court as in Chambers
4:15p.m.
For Application to Vary Bail
Mickhael Bechara

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
10:30 a.m.

For Trial
Bulk Frozen Foods Pty Ltd
v
Kim David Excell

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
9:15 a.m. via Telephone
For Mention
Gunns Finance Pty Ltd
v
Kuragamage

Gunns Finance Pty Ltd
v
Colvin

12:00 p.m.
Re: Statutory Demand
Hobart Country Club & Golf Resort Pty Ltd
v
Li

LAUNCESTON
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am For Mention
Alissa Margaret Moore
Mark Andrew Jenkins

For Legal Argument
Darryl Scott Donohue

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15pm In Court as in Chambers For Directions Hearing via video-link to Court 7, Supreme Court, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Rodney David Synfield and Neil Raymond Graham
v
Senior Sergeant John Parker

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiciton
10:00am For Trial
Nicholas Charles Pitt

4:15pm For Mention via video-link to Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Matthew Brian Williams

For Sentence via video-link to Supreme Court, Alexander Street, Burnie
Mark Christopher Bramich

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Porter

Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Mention (via video link from Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston)
Matthew Brian Williams

For Sentence (via video link from Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston)
Mark Christopher Bramich

______________________________________________________
(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 several matters on the 29 October 2014. In the criminal division, Jamie Peter Smart and Rhys Louis Gardner faced a part-heard trial, while Shane Leslie Godfrey Craig Jeffrey Field and Vance Roy Lobban appeared for bail consent and facts and sentence respectively. Tanya Maree Devine appeared for facts and sentence and an application to review an order suspending sentence, and Jason Charles Dare appeared for facts and sentence. In the civil division, Rodney David Synfield and Neil Raymond Graham filed a suit against Senior Sergeant John Parker for a directions hearing via video-link. Bulk Frozen Foods Pty Ltd brought a case against Kim David Excell. Gunns Finance Pty Ltd brought two cases against Kuragama and Colvin, and Hobart Country Club & Golf Resort Pty Ltd filed a case against Li. In Launceston, Alissa Margaret Moore and Mark Andrew Jenkins appeared for a mention, while Darryl Scott Donohue faced a directions hearing via video-link. Nicholas Charles Pitt faced a trial, and Matthew Brian Williams and Mark Christopher Bramich appeared for mentions and sentencing respectively.

The court was required to decide several legal issues, including whether the defendants in the criminal cases were guilty of the charges brought against them. In the civil cases, the court had to determine whether the plaintiffs had valid claims against the defendants and, if so, what remedies were appropriate. The court also had to consider whether the defendants in the criminal cases were eligible for bail, and whether the sentences imposed on the defendants were appropriate.

The court's reasoning and outcome were not provided in the document. However, it is likely that the court considered the evidence presented by both sides and applied the relevant legal principles to reach its decisions. The court may have found some defendants guilty and imposed appropriate sentences, while acquitting others. In the civil cases, the court may have found in favour of some plaintiffs and awarded them remedies, while dismissing the claims of others.

The final orders of the court were not provided in the document. However, it is likely that the court issued written judgments or orders setting out its reasoning and decisions in each case. These documents would be available to the parties and the public, subject to any confidentiality or publication restrictions imposed by law.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 29 October 2014

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established