Rosemary Gamble, the owner of the company that supplied the jumping castle to the school on the day of the tragedy, appeared in the Devonport Magistrates Court in Tasmania via phone on Friday, March 22.

Ms Gamble pleaded not guilty in early February to a charge laid by WorkSafe Tasmania, and on Friday Magistrate Duncan Fairley set down a "tentative" hearing date of September 2.

Defence lawyer Christopher Dockray told Mr Fairley his office had received the evidence from Crown prosecutors in "dribs and drabs" and that it totaled "many thousands of pages".

He also told the court the defence team had secured the services of two experts from New South Wales; a geotechnical engineer from firm GHD and an inflatables expert from the University of Western Sydney.

Mr Dockray said they were seeking access to both the jumping castle, which the court heard is currently in police custody in Devonport, and the Hillcrest school oval where the disaster occurred.

The court heard that both experts had advised the legal team that if they are granted access they could be on the Coast in the coming weeks, and have reports completed by June.

Crown prosecutor Madeleine Wilson said there was no opposition to what Mr Dockray was seeking, and Mr Fairley ordered that arrangements be made for the inspections and examinations to occur.

Ms Wilson said a police forensic photographer had on a previous occasion taken about 1000 photographs of the jumping castle, but would also like to again be granted access to create a 3D model of the inflatable.

The parties also agreed that the jumping castle should not be inflated where the public may see it as that could be traumatic.

Family members of the victims in the rear of the court were visibly emotional during this discussion.

Mr Dockray and Ms Wilson agreed that much of the factual basis of the case would not be in dispute, and Ms Wilson said a "court book" of agreed facts may be created to assist the proceedings.

Mr Fairley also said the court was "acutely aware" that significant time had passed since the event itself, and "tentatively" listed the matter for an approximate two-week hearing on September 2.

A mention date was also listed for the matter to return to court on July 5.