Subscribe to the RSS feed Print this page

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
F v The Queen
Case number
SC 61/2018
Summary
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 trial.  Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
Result

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 trial.  Publication in law report or law digest permitted.  
29 August 2018
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
High Court decision
Not publicly available
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Case name
Douglas Craig Schmuck v Opua Coastal Preservation Incorporated and Far North District Council
Case number
SC 66/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to the interpretation of the scope of easements – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by not relying on resource consents when examining the easements at issue – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not considering the question of indefeasibility.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Opua Coastal Preservation Incorporated v Far North District Council [2018] NZCA 262).
B The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal.
21 February 2019
________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The decision of the second respondent as delegate of the Minister of Conservation to consent to the challenged easements referred to at [32] of the Reasons of the Court is reinstated.
C Costs are reserved.
D Leave is reserved to the parties to apply for consequential orders if required.
29 October 2019
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
OPUA COASTAL PRESERVATION INCORPORATED v FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL [2017] NZHC 154 [14 February 2017]
Court of Appeal decision
OPUA COASTAL PRESERVATION INCORPORATED v FAR NORTH DISTRICT COUNCIL [2018] NZCA 262 [20 July 2018]
Leave judgment - leave granted
DOUGLAS CRAIG SCHMUCK v OPUA COASTAL PRESERVATION INCORPORATED [2019] NZSC 7 [21 February 2019] (PDF, 181 KB)
Substantive judgment
DOUGLAS CRAIG SCHMUCK v OPUA COASTAL PRESERVATION INCORPORATED [2019] NZSC 118 [29 October 2019] (PDF, 901 KB)
Supreme court decision
Cost: DOUGLAS CRAIG SCHMUCK v OPUA COASTAL PRESERVATION INCORPORATED [2019] NZSC 155 [23 December 2019] (PDF, 160 KB)
Case name
George Whichman v The Queen
Case number
SC 69/2018
Summary
Not publicly available 
Result
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Case name
H v The Queen
Case number
SC 70/2018
Summary
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 TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED. 
Result
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 TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Case name
T v The Queen
Case number
SC 74/2018
Summary
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 RETRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED. 
Result
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 RETRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.
Case name
R (SC 78/2018) v The King
Case number
SC 78/2018
Summary
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 retrial.  Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
Result
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 retrial.  Publication in law report or law digest permitted. 6 October 2023
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Case name
Shark Experience Limited v Pauamac5 Incorporated, Director-General of Conservation and Shark Dive New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 86/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the Wildlife Act 1953.
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is granted (PauaMAC5 Inc v Director-General of Conservation [2018] NZCA 348).
C The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to hold that shark cage diving is an offence under s 63A of the Wildlife Act 1953.
11 December 2018
________________________________
A The application for leave to adduce further evidence is dismissed.  
B The appeal is allowed.
C The Court of Appeal’s declaration that “Shark cage diving is an offence under s 63A Wildlife Act 1953” is set aside.   
D There is no order as to costs.   
11 October 2019
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
PAUAMAC5 INCORPORATED v DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF CONSERVATION [2017] NZHC 1182 [2 June 2017]
Court of Appeal decision
PAUAMAC5 INCORPORATED v DIRECTOR-GENERAL OF CONSERVATION [2018] NZCA 348 [4 September 2018]
Leave judgment - leave granted
SHARK EXPERIENCE LIMITED v PAUAMAC5 INCORPORATED [2018] NZSC 121 [11 December 2018] (PDF, 185 KB)
Substantive judgment
SHARK EXPERIENCE LIMITED v PAUAMAC5 INCORPORATED [2019] NZSC 111 [11 October 2019] (PDF, 254 KB)
Supreme court decision
Cost judgment: DOUGLAS CRAIG SCHMUCK v OPUA COASTAL PRESERVATION INCORPORATED [2019] NZSC 155 [23 December 2019] (PDF, 160 KB)
Case name
Robt Jones Holdings Limited v Anthony John McCullagh and Stephen Mark Lawrence liquidators of Northern Crest Investments Limited
Case number
SC 87/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993, s 292 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there is no requirement in s 292 that a voidable transaction diminish the pool of assets available to creditors.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Robt Jones Holdings Ltd v McCullagh [2018] NZCA 358).
B The approved question is whether the payments totalling $262,758.05 made to the applicant by MSH No 2 Pty Ltd on behalf of Northern Crest Investments Ltd were insolvent transactions as defined in s 292 of the Companies Act 1993.
6 December 2018
___________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay the respondents costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
9 August 2019
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
MCCULLAGH v ROBT JONES HOLDINGS LIMITED [2017] NZHC 2182 [8 September 2017]
Court of Appeal decision
ROBT. JONES HOLDINGS LIMITED v MCCULLAGH [2018] NZCA 358 [10 September 2018]
Leave judgment - leave granted
ROBT JONES HOLDINGS LIMITED v McCULLAGH [2018] NZSC 120 [6 December 2018] (PDF, 240 KB)
Substantive judgment
ROBT. JONES HOLDINGS LIMITED v ANTHONY JOHN MCCULLAGH AND STEPHEN MARK LAWRENCE [2019] NZSC 86 [9 August 2019] (PDF, 223 KB)
Case name
A v The Queen
Case number
SC 91/2018
Summary
Order prohibiting publication of the judgment or any part of the proceedings (including the result) in the 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. 
Result

Order prohibiting publication of the judgment or any part of the proceedings (including the result) in the 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.

20 December 2018
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Case name
Lemuel Misa v The Queen
Case number
SC 93/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction on the basis that there was no miscarriage of justice – Whether the jury was properly directed at trial.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Misa v R [2018] NZCA 293).
B The approved question is whether there was a miscarriage of justice at the applicant’s trial.
17 April 2019
_______________________
The appeal is dismissed.
2 December 2019
Date of hearing
11 July 2019
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Ellen France, Williams and Arnold JJ
Media Releases
Court of Appeal decision
MISA v R [2018] NZCA 293 [6 August 2018]
Leave judgment - leave granted
LEMUEL MISA v R [2019] NZSC 42 [17 April 2019] (PDF, 33 KB)
Substantive judgment
LEMUEL MISA v R [2019] NZSC 134 [2 December 2019] (PDF, 162 KB)
Page 24 of 68