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
Wayne Thomas Patterson v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2008
Summary
[Criminal – sentencing appeal – whether sentence manifestly excessive – the appropriate starting point for serious fraud – whether recovery of funds, under the Proceeds of Crimes Act 1991 or by any other way short of voluntary reparation, should be recognised in sentencing – the admissibility of extraneous material from a Victim Impact Statement under s 9 Evidence Act 2006, and its relationship with the provisions of the Sentencing Act 2002 – relevance, and proof, of overseas convictions in sentencing.[2008] NZCA 75 CA 573/07 31 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
PATTERSON v R SC 38/2008 [28 August 2008] (PDF, 24 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
28 August 2008.
Case name
R v The Queen
Case number
SC 45/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – alleged miscarriage of justice in terms of s 385(1)(c) of the Crimes Act 1961 – appellant found guilty on six representative counts alleging sexual offending against the complainant – whether the fact that evidence from several potential witnesses was not put before the jury at the trial and the fact that the trial Judge refused to discharge the jury after the complainant made contact with members of the jury have resulted in a miscarriage of justice.[2008] NZCA 196 CA 32/07 30 June 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
R v R SC45/2008 [8 October 2008] (PDF, 16 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
8 October 2008
8 October 2008
Case name
Shane Huia Matenga v The Queen
Case number
SC 50/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – Crimes Act 1961 s 385(1) – applicant was convicted of rape and unlawful sexual connection – at trial, inadmissible expert opinion evidence was given as to the central issue of consent – on appeal, the Court of Appeal held that, while there was a risk of a miscarriage of justice under s 385(1)(c), the proviso should be applied as no substantial miscarriage of justice had actually occurred – whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct principles in deciding to apply the proviso – whether the finding that there was a risk of a miscarriage of justice is incompatible with the holding that no substantial miscarriage of justice had actually occurred.[2008] NZCA 260 CA 216/07 28 July 2008
Leave judgment - leave granted
MATENGA v R SC 50/2008 [20 October 2008] (PDF, 12 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted.
20 October 2008.
20 October 2008.
Result
Appeal allowed. New Trial ordered.
13 March 2009.
Case name
Woolworths Limited v The Commerce Commission and others
Case number
SC 51/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – section 66 Commerce Act 1986 – acquisitions that will have or are likely to have the effect of substantially lessening competition – whether Court of Appeal erred in its approach to giving clearance under s 66 – whether clearance can be declined on the grounds that it is uncertain whether the acquisition will cause a substantial lessening of competition – whether the approach to be adopted by the Court in s 66 cases is different to the balance of probabilities approach used in ordinary civil cases – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to take an approach to the term ‘likely’ which extended to scenarios that were merely possible or speculative – whether ‘substantial’ effects on competition include effects that are merely nominal or ephemeral – if Court of Appeal test was correct, whether Court of Appeal should have referred case back to High Court to apply correct test – whether Court of Appeal had proper regard to all the evidence when applying s 66.[2008] NZCA 276 CA 55/2008 1 August 2008
Dates
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
17 October 2008.
17 October 2008.
Case name
Alfred Taenga Mata v The Queen
Case number
SC 60/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – Supreme Court Act s 14 – leap-frog appeal against District Court judgment – whether exceptional circumstances exist so as to justify taking the appeal directly to the Supreme Court.Evidence Act 2006 s 43 – District Court judgment ruled that certain “propensity” evidence is admissible at the applicant’s up-coming trial for robbery – the incident of propensity that the Crown sought to adduce occurred one year later than the incident that is the subject of the current proceedings, and resulted in charges being brought against the applicant – whether a non-proven criminal allegation is capable of being used as propensity evidence – whether, in deciding whether propensity evidence should be admitted under s 43, courts are required to follow common law principles – whether the specific robbery allegation sought to be adduced as propensity evidence meets the threshold of similar fact evidence that can be considered as an “other matter” when assessing the prejudicial effect of the evidence under s 43(4).CRI 2007-092-006967 14th August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MATA v R SC 60/2008 [15 September 2008] (PDF, 15 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
15 September 2008
Case name
Kevin Francis John Casey v The Queen
Case number
SC 66/2008
Summary
Criminal Appeal – pre-trial application – drink driving – admissibility of evidential breath test printout – whether there was a lawful roadside detention – whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted s 114 of the Land Transport Act 1998 – claim proper breath screening procedure was not adopted – whether s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006 should have been applied to this claim – whether the right to consult a lawyer under s 23(1)(b) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act was complied with[2008] NZCA 335 CA 246/2008 1 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
CASEY v R SC 66/2008 [5 December 2008] (PDF, 16 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
5 December 2008
Case name
Julian Paul Burke and Gillian Elizabeth Burke v Advances Securities Limited
Case number
SC 68/2008
Summary
Civil – Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003, s 13 – Court of Appeal considered that certain evidence operated to rebut the presumption of a consumer credit contract under s 13 – whether Court of Appeal’ s conclusion was supported by the evidence. [2008] NZCA 93 CA 696/07 18 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed, with costs $2,000 to the respondent.
17 November 2008
Case name
APN New Zealand Limited v Simunovich Fisheries Limited and others
Case number
SC 69/2008
Summary
Civil – Defamation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the obligation in s 38 of the Defamation Act 1992 applies to the pleading of a stand alone defence of truth – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the “repetition rule” and the “ conduct rule” apply to pleadings of truth - whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the change in approach to admissibility of hearsay evidence in the Evidence Act 2006 does not affect the applicability of the “repetition rule” to a pleading of truth – was the Court of Appeal wrong to hold that it is not open to a defendant to plead the opinions and statements of third parties in support of a truth defence, or in support of an honest opinion defence.[2008] NZCA 350 CA 447/07 CA 584/07 8 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Geoffrey Martin Smith v The Queen
Case number
SC 73/2008
Summary
Criminal – application for leave to appeal against conviction – applicant convicted of offences against the Tax Administration Act 1994 – nature of intent required by s 143B(1)(f) of the Act – whether s 109 of the Act applies to evidence in a criminal trial – whether the trial Judge misdirected the jury in relation to PAYE, GST, and the impact of certain assessments before them. [2008] NZCA 371 CA 275/2008 17 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SMITH v R SC 73/2008 [12 December 2008] (PDF, 23 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
12 December 2008.
Case name
Bernard Terence Whimp v The Queen
Case number
SC 83/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – Companies Act 1993 – applicant convicted of burglary, removing records of a company in liquidation, and failing to supply records of a company in liquidation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding there was sufficient evidence to establish a tenancy of the premises which could be enforced by the liquidator – whether the Court of Appeal relied on inadmissible secondary and hearsay evidence in doing so – whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that there was sufficient evidence of a licence over the property, the circumstances of which determined the applicant’s rights in relation to the premises and rendered him a trespasser – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining the scope of a liquidator’s powers under s 261(1) of the Act.[2008] NZCA 405 CA 523/2008 8 October 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WHIMP v R SC 83/2008 [4 February 2009] (PDF, 17 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
4 February 2009
Page 19 of 23