Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 7 October 2015 Summary

SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA LAW LISTS FOR WEDNESDAY, 7 OCTOBER 2015

HOBART

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before the FULL COURT
10:00 a.m.
For Hearing

Hong Fei Chu
v
Daniel Johnston Russell

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Before Justice TENNENT

Criminal Jurisdiction

In Court as in Chambers

2:15 p.m.

For Bail Application via Video-Link to Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Matthew John Davey

Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:00 p.m.
For Sentence via Video-Link
Daryl Royston Wayne Cook

For Sentence
KR

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15 p.m.
For Mention via video-link
Brett Andrew Kitchin

Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
In Court as in Chambers
4:00 p.m.
For Bail Application
Kevin McIntosh
Stefan James Somerville

Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE

Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15p.m.
For Re-Sentence by video link to Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Benjamin Edward Bakes

Court 1, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Judgment via video link to Court 1, Supreme Court, Burnie
Thomas Gardam
v
WTH Pty Ltd trading as Avis Australia

LAUNCESTON

Court 2, Cameron Street, Launceston

Before Justice TENNENT

Criminal Jurisdiction

In Court as in Chambers

2:15pm For Bail Application via Video-Link from Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart

Matthew John Davey

Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Justice WOOD
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15pm For Mention via Video-Link from Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Brett Andrew Kitchin

BURNIE
Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie before Justice Pearce
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
2:15pm
For Re-Sentence by video link from Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Benjamin Edward Bakes

Court 1, Alexander Street, Burnie
Before Chief Justice BLOW
Civil Jurisdiction
4:15 p.m.
For Judgment via video link to Court 1, Supreme Court, Hobart
Thomas Gardam
v
WTH Pty Ltd trading as Avis Australia

______________________________________________________
(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 was engaged in various matters on October 7, 2015, involving both civil and criminal cases. The cases spanned different locations and jurisdictions within the state, with some hearings taking place via video-link to accommodate the geographical dispersion of parties and witnesses. Among the cases listed were bail applications, re-sentencing hearings, and final judgments, reflecting the breadth of legal matters the court handles.

The legal issues before the court included questions regarding the granting of bail, the appropriateness of sentences, and the resolution of contractual disputes. Each case presented unique facts and legal arguments that required careful consideration. For instance, bail applications involved assessing the risk of flight, potential interference with witnesses, and the severity of the charges. Sentencing matters required balancing the principles of deterrence, rehabilitation, and proportionality. The contractual dispute involved interpretation of terms, compliance with statutory obligations, and the calculation of damages.

The court’s reasoning in each case was tailored to the specific legal issues presented. In bail applications, Justices considered the principles of bail as set out in the Bail Act, weighing the accused's rights against the need to protect the community. Sentencing hearings involved an analysis of the accused’s criminal history, the circumstances of the offence, and the impact on victims. The judgment in the contractual dispute involved detailed interpretation of the contract, examination of evidence, and application of relevant legal principles to determine liability and damages. The final orders varied, with some granting bail, others imposing sentences, and one awarding damages in a civil matter.

In summary, the Supreme Court of Tasmania handled a diverse range of cases, applying established legal principles to specific factual scenarios. The outcomes reflected the court’s commitment to justice, fairness, and the rule of law.

Supreme Court of Tasmania Law Lists for Wednesday, 7 October 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

Orders of the court

Background to the litigation

Evidence Before The Court

Reasons for decision

Legal Principle Established