The court was created by Letters Patent dated 4 February 1814 issued by King George III the reigning sovereign of England of the time. The court was styled the “Lieutenant Governor’s Court” pursuant to the patent. It was composed of a deputy judge-advocate for Van Diemen's Land, who was commonly known as the “judge-advocate”, and two other persons inhabiting the island appointed by the Lieutenant Governor of Van Diemen's Land. The judge-advocate was the presiding officer. The lieutenant governor was not actually involved in the operation of the court nor did he preside as its head. The court could also sit with only two members, but in that case, one of those members had to be the judge advocate. The court had jurisdiction hear and determine summarily actions relating to land, houses, debt, contract, trespass, and just about any other common law or equitable case up to £50 sterling. The cause of action had to arise in the island of Van Diemen's Land. The court was abolished in 1823 when it was replaced by the Supreme Court of Van Diemen's Land established by Letters Patents dated 13 October 1823. The letters were authorised by the British Parliament through the passing of the New South Wales Act 1823 (UK). The abolition was on the recommendation of Commissioner John Bigge who was appointed by the British authorities to inquire into the state of the New South Wales colony. Edward Abbott, the first “Tasmanian” judge-advocate, arrived in Hobart in February 1815. His arrival meant that it was technically possible for the court to sit in early 1815. This was not to be, as his formal appointment had not arrived, so he could not be sworn into the office. In April, Lieutenant-Governor Thomas Davey proclaimed martial law which further delayed Abbott's swearing in. Abbott returned to Sydney to collect documents concerning his court. He returned to Hobart in November and in December opened the court for sitting. Governor of New South Wales, Lachlan Macquarie, did not think that Abbott was up to the task of running the court. However, Abbott proved to be the right man for the position at the time. Whilst he had a small knowledge of the law, he simplified procedure, reduced fees, and proceeded by common sense rather than legal niceties. Royal Commissioner Bigge contrasted the operation of this court with the Governors Court in Sydney and found that Abbott's court operated more efficiently and effectively than the Sydney-based court.