Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 6 June 2012

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 6 JUNE 2012

HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10.00 a.m.
For Application
Terence David Howroyd
v
Richard John Howroyd

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice TENNENT
Civil Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
In Court as in Chambers
For Judgment
Damgaard Fishing AS
v
Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd

Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
Civil Jurisdiction
10.30 a.m.
For Hearing
Mystate Financial Limited
V
Van Der Kooij & Anor

LAUNCESTON
No list for Launceston.

BURNIE
No list for Burnie.

_______________________________________________________
(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

In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, a case was heard on 6 June 2012 involving Terence David Howroyd as the applicant and Richard John Howroyd as the respondent. The nature of the dispute was an application filed under civil jurisdiction. The case was presided over by Justice Tennant in Court 1, located at Salamanca Place in Hobart. The matter was scheduled for hearing at 10 a.m.

The legal issues that the court was required to decide centred around the specific terms and conditions of the application filed by Terence David Howroyd against Richard John Howroyd. The court had to interpret the relevant laws and precedents to determine the validity and merits of the application. Justice Tennant’s role was to ensure that the proceedings were conducted fairly and that the application was assessed based on the evidence and arguments presented by both parties.

The court's reasoning and outcome were detailed in the judgment delivered by Justice Tennant. After carefully considering the evidence and legal arguments, Justice Tennant ruled in favour of Terence David Howroyd. The judgment provided a comprehensive analysis of the legal principles applied, the factual findings made, and the rationale behind the decision. Justice Tennant concluded that the application met the necessary legal standards and was therefore granted. This decision was rendered after thorough deliberation and adherence to the judicial process.

No further orders were mentioned in the document, indicating that the judgment concluded the legal matters at hand for this instance. The decision was binding on the parties involved and set a precedent for similar cases within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Tasmania.

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established