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.
24 June 2024
Case information summary 2024 (as at 21 June 2024) – Cases where leave granted (121 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 21 June 2024) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 125 KB)
All years
Case name
Cecilia Victoria Uhrle v The Queen
Case number
SC 76/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether there is jurisdiction to advance a second conviction appeal in the Supreme Court when an application for leave to appeal has already been dismissed.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
9 July 2020
9 July 2020
Transcripts
- Hearing date 18 February 2020 (PDF, 154 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 62 (PDF, 166 KB)
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Substantive judgment
Case name
Peter Robert Howse v The Queen
Case number
SC 80/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the applicant should have been convicted at trial.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
20 September 2019
20 September 2019
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from - High Court of Wellington
Not publicly available
Case name
Dermot Gregory Nottingham v The Queen
Case number
SC 83/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Harassment Act 1997, s 8(1) – Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 211(1) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against conviction and sentence.
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
12 December 2019
_______________
A The judgment of 12 December 2019 (Nottingham v R [2019] NZSC 144) is recalled and leave to appeal is granted in relation to the appeal against sentence.
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to impose the maximum period of home detention in circumstances where the offender had already served a period of home detention in relation to the offending.
20 March 2020
----------------------------------------------
A The appeal against sentence is allowed. The sentence of 12 months’ home detention imposed by the Court of Appeal is varied by replacing that sentence with a sentence of eight and a half months’ home detention with a start date of 30 July 2019.
B Having served more than 12 months’ home detention, Mr Nottingham has served that part of his sentence. The standard and special post-detention conditions imposed by the Court of Appeal remain in place for the remainder of the 12 month and six month post detention periods respectively.
C The remaining period of community work to be served by Mr Nottingham is remitted.
31 July 2020
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
12 December 2019
_______________
A The judgment of 12 December 2019 (Nottingham v R [2019] NZSC 144) is recalled and leave to appeal is granted in relation to the appeal against sentence.
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to impose the maximum period of home detention in circumstances where the offender had already served a period of home detention in relation to the offending.
20 March 2020
----------------------------------------------
A The appeal against sentence is allowed. The sentence of 12 months’ home detention imposed by the Court of Appeal is varied by replacing that sentence with a sentence of eight and a half months’ home detention with a start date of 30 July 2019.
B Having served more than 12 months’ home detention, Mr Nottingham has served that part of his sentence. The standard and special post-detention conditions imposed by the Court of Appeal remain in place for the remainder of the 12 month and six month post detention periods respectively.
C The remaining period of community work to be served by Mr Nottingham is remitted.
31 July 2020
Date of hearing
28 May 2020
Judges
William Young, Glazebrook, O’Regan , Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 28 May 2020 (PDF, 195 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 74 (PDF, 126 KB)
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Case name
Phillip Richard Joe v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal made errors of fact in its sentencing decision – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B Leave is reserved to renew the application in the circumstances set out below at [5].
[5] The application for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed but without prejudice to the ability to file another application for leave to appeal to this Court if the recall application is dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
4 November 2019
B Leave is reserved to renew the application in the circumstances set out below at [5].
[5] The application for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed but without prejudice to the ability to file another application for leave to appeal to this Court if the recall application is dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
4 November 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Riki Scott Steen Walls v Ulsterman Holdings Limited (in liquidation) and Vivien Madsen-Ries and Henry David Levin as liquidators of Ulsterman Holdings Limited (in liquidation)
Case number
SC 88/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – High Court Rules 2016 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that neither the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 nor the principles of natural justice were engaged in interpreting r 15.9(2) of the High Court Rules 2016 in the applicant’s circumstances.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondents.
15 November 2019
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondents.
15 November 2019
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Lee Kalso Peri Thompson v The Queen
Case number
SC 90/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring a pre-trial appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of the trial. Publication in a law report or law digest permitted.
23 October 2019
B Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of the trial. Publication in a law report or law digest permitted.
23 October 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Paul Neville Bublitz v The Queen
Case number
SC 91/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Crimes Act 1961, s 220 – Party to offence – Failure to give adequate reasons for verdict – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against conviction.
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
9 December 2019
9 December 2019
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Case name
Bruce Alexander McKay v The Queen
Case number
SC 92/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Crimes Act 1961, s 220 – Party to offence – Failure to give adequate reasons for verdict – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against conviction.
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
9 December 2019
9 December 2019
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Lance David Morrison v The Queen
Case number
SC 93/2019 SC 94/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s quantum appeal for costs under s 5 of the Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967
Result
A The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
B There is no order as to costs.
9 December 2019
B There is no order as to costs.
9 December 2019
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
R v Legal Services Commissioner
Case number
SC 101/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Legal Services Act 2011, s 7 – Whether the High Court erred in finding that an “administrative tribunal or judicial authority” does not include the United Nations Human Rights Committee.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order as to costs.
6 December 2019
B There is no order as to costs.
6 December 2019
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Page 21 of 79