Supreme Court case information
Listed below are the substantive Supreme Court cases for the year along with appeals still to be determined or cases awaiting hearing.
Information giving an overview of the case is included along with media releases and links to judgments being appealed when available.
All 2024 - 2014 Supreme Court cases dismissed or deemed to be dismissed where a notice of abandonment was received can be found here.
Transcripts for cases heard before the Supreme Court are included provided they are not suppressed. Transcripts from pre-trial hearings are not published until the final disposition of trial. These are unedited transcripts and they are not a formal record of the Court’s proceedings. The Ministry of Justice does not accept responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of any material and recommends that users exercise their own skill and care with respect to its use.
23 December 2024
Case information summary 2024 (as at 23 December 2024) – Cases where leave granted (126 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 23 December 2024) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 116 KB)
All years
Case name
Telecom New Zealand Limited v Vodafone New Zealand Limited and Commerce Commission
Case number
SC 45/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Communications – Telecommunications Act 2001 – Whether the High Court erred in holding that there was no reviewable inconsistency or error of law in the Commerce Commission’s determination to reduce material input in its modelling methodology based on the removal from its modelling of a technological optimisation factor.Civ 2008 485 2194/295/ 2341 1 April 2010
Substantive judgment
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript
Hearing dates : 21 – 24 February
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted.
Approved ground of appeal is whether the Commerce Commission in making its determination complied with applicable statutory provsion.
14 May 2010
__________________________
Appeal dismissed. No order for costs.
17 November 2011
Case name
Telecom New Zealand Limited v Vodafone New Zealand Limited and Commerce Commission
Case number
SC 46/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Communications - Telecommunications Act 2001 - Whether the Commerce Commission erred in its calculation of the net cost of providing Telecommunications Services Obligation under the Act by ceasing to introduce new technology into the modelled network.Civ 2008 485 2293/2205/2206 1 April 2010
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. Approved ground of appeal is whether the Commerce Commission in making its determination complied with applicable statutory provsion.
14 May 2010
________________________________
Appeal dismissed. No order for costs.
17 November 2011
14 May 2010
________________________________
Appeal dismissed. No order for costs.
17 November 2011
Substantive judgment
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
James Louis Mason v The Queen
Case number
SC 47/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in combining two allegations of criminal conduct to be included in a single count in the indictment.[2010] NZCA 170 CA 481/2009 5 May 2010
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground of appeal is whether the combining in a single count in the indictment of the two allegations (punching the child and pulling his ear) resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
7 July 2010
___________________________
Appeal allowed and the conviction is quashed. No order for a new trial.
3 November 2010
7 July 2010
___________________________
Appeal allowed and the conviction is quashed. No order for a new trial.
3 November 2010
Transcripts
- sc 47 2010 james louis mason v the queen (PDF, 100 KB)
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
MASON v R SC 47/2010 [7 July 2010] (PDF, 6 KB)
Substantive judgment
MASON v R SC 47/2010 [3 November 2010] (PDF, 66 KB)
Transcript
Hearing date : 19 October 2010
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Case name
W and W v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 48/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Duty of Care and Limitation Act 1950 – State liability claim for historic abuse while appellants under social welfare supervision and in institutional care – Whether Court of Appeal erred in application of legal test for disability under Limitation Act – Whether limitation test of reasonable discoverability of harm too restrictive and inconsistent with precedent/international law – Whether test of reasonable discoverability should apply more widely than cases of sexual abuse cases – Whether reasonable discoverability requires recognition by complainant that assault wrongful/actionable – Whether Court of Appeal further erred in law as to: causation and material contribution to harm of vulnerable persons; scope of duty of care by Department and/or social workers; false imprisonment – Whether facts support an award of exemplary damages directly or vicariously or a finding of non-delegable duty of care.[2010] NZCA 139 CA 714/2007 23 April 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
W & W v ATTORNEY-GENERAL SC 48/2010 [29 June 2010] (PDF, 45 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
29 June 2010.
Case name
Robert Frank Terry v Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 49/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing - Sentencing Act 2002 – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – High Court quashed conviction for failure to complete required hours of work and held the existing sentence of community work imposed remained - Whether the High Court lacked jurisdiction to re-impose sentence originally imposed by the District Court after point in time – Whether the High Court failed to consider relevant law.CRI 2010 418 01 23 April 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
16 July 2010.
Case name
PT v The Queen
Case number
SC 50/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the evidence of a general practitioner was relevant and substantially helpful under ss 7 and 25 of the Evidence Act 2006 respectively; whether the trial judge erred in his directions to the jury and if so, whether the errors amount to a miscarriage of justice. [2010] NZCA 151 CA 604/2009 27 April 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
sc 50 2010 pt v the queen leave judgment (PDF, 46 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
20 July 2010
Case name
Vupul Romik Sharma v The Queen
Case number
SC 51/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Crimes Act 1961 – Abduction and sexual violation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge did not need to direct the jury on the issue of intoxication[2009] NZCA 540 CA 244/2009 17 November 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SHARMA v R SC 51/2010 [13 August 2010] (PDF, 10 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
13 August 2010.
Case name
GE Custodians v Bruce Leonard Bartle and Dorothy Judith Bartle and others
Case number
SC 52/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the credit contracts entered into by the appellant and the respondents were oppressive in terms of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003; Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of “oppression”; whether it is possible for a contract to be oppressive despite independent legal advice being received: whether knowledge of a third party could be attributed to the appellant in the absence of a relationship of agency.[2010] NZCA 174 CA 627/2009 6 May 2010
Result
Leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground of appeal is whether the credit contracts were oppressive in terms of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003.
5 August 2010
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside. The case is remitted to the High Court for determination of issues reserved by that Court for further consideration. The appellant is awarded costs in this Court against the first and second respondents of $25,000 together with its reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar. The costs order made by the Court of Appeal is reversed.
3 December 2010
5 August 2010
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside. The case is remitted to the High Court for determination of issues reserved by that Court for further consideration. The appellant is awarded costs in this Court against the first and second respondents of $25,000 together with its reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar. The costs order made by the Court of Appeal is reversed.
3 December 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 20-21 October 2010_SC 52/2010 (PDF, 1.1 MB)
Media Releases
- MR [2010] NZSC 146 (PDF, 86 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Jeremy William Mataira v The Queen
Case number
SC 53/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Assault – Appeal against convictions based on alleged misconduct at trial – Whether Appellant denied ability to mount a credible appeal to Court of Appeal because evidence of alleged misconduct at trial unavailable.[2010] NZCA 190 CA 162/2009 14 May 2010
Dates
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
13 August 2010.
Case name
Alan Parekura Torohinga Haronga v Waitangi Tribunal and others
Case number
SC 54/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Judicial Review – Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 – Whether Appellant should be granted urgent Waitangi Tribunal remedies hearing in respect of application for resumption of Crown forest land subject to current settlement negotiations – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that Crown Forests Assets Act 1989 did not substantively alter Waitangi Tribunal’s role in relation to making of binding recommendations in respect of Crown forest land – Whether Court of Appeal failed to take into account that circumstances meant Tribunal did not exercise its discretion and Appellant could never have gained remedies hearing – Whether Court of Appeal failed to take into account right of smaller claimants to seek a remedy under s 8HB of Treaty of Waitangi Act.[2010] NZCA 201 CA 73/2010 19 May 2010
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground is whether in making his decision of 21 October 2009 in Wai 1489 to decline an urgent remedies hearing, the presiding Judge in the Waitangi Tribunal erred in law.
10 August 2010
___________________________
A The appeal is allowed and the determination of Judge Clark is quashed. B The matter is remitted to the Waitangi Tribunal with the direction that it must proceed urgently to hear the claim. C The second respondent must pay the appellant costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar. Costs in the Court of Appeal and High Court are to be fixed by those Courts
10 August 2010
___________________________
A The appeal is allowed and the determination of Judge Clark is quashed. B The matter is remitted to the Waitangi Tribunal with the direction that it must proceed urgently to hear the claim. C The second respondent must pay the appellant costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar. Costs in the Court of Appeal and High Court are to be fixed by those Courts
Transcripts
- Hearing date 11 and 12 October 2010 (PDF, 1.1 MB)
- Hearing date 6 August 2010 (PDF, 306 KB)
Media Releases
- Media release dated 19 May 2011 (PDF, 67 KB)
Substantive judgment
Page 191 of 252