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
Brent John Gilchrist v The Queen
Case number
SC 69/2006
Summary
Criminal – Tax Administration Act – tax evasion – applicant convicted of knowingly failing to provide Commissioner of Inland Revenue with information when required to do so pursuant to a notice to furnish information – standard of proof of delegation of authority from Commissioner – standard of intent to evade payment of tax.CA 29/06 18 August 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal granted.

29 September 2006

________________

Appeal dismissed.

15 December 2006

Case name
Alain Michael Yves Mafart and Dominique Angela Francoise Prieur v Television New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 70/2006
Summary
Civil – Criminal Proceedings (Search of Court Records) Rules 1974 – video footage of guilty pleas in 1985 trial for bombing of Rainbow Warrior – whether Court of Appeal erred in failing adequately to take account of the administration of justice – whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to protect privacy interests of appellants, or in balancing those interests with freedom of information – whether Court of Appeal erred in departing from previous decisions in respect of the footage – whether Court of Appeal and High Court erred in failing to uphold assurance given to counsel by Judge in 1985 in respect of footage – whether assurance overtaken by consent orders.CA 92/05 7 and 10 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs of $2,500 to respondent. 26 September 2006
Case name
Myles James  de Montalk v The Queen
Case number
SC 71/2006
Summary
Criminal – application for leave to appeal out of time – whether Court of Appeal’s alleged refusal to disclose evidence was tainted by racial, religious, or ethnical bias – whether Court of Appeal thereby in breach of New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 25(a).CA 11/04 27 June 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

18 October 2006

Case name
Kimberley  Birkenfeld v Yachting New Zealand Inc
Case number
SC 72/2006
Summary
Civil – application by respondent for decree limiting its liability – whether Court of Appeal was correct in holding that a rigid inflatable boat (under 24m in length) is a ‘ship’ for the purposes of the application of s 85 of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 – whether purpose of Limitation Convention to facilitate commercial shipping – application of the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships.CA 171/05 9 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $1,500 to respondent. 10 November 2006
Case name
Hayden Matthew Johnston & Earnscleugh Vineyard Ltd v Schist Mountain Orchards Litd
Case number
SC 75/2006
Summary
Civil – contract – interpretation of agreement for sale and purchase - whether Court of Appeal erred in determining that the agreement permitted the respondent to obtain consent for a subdivision that contained a right of way with dimensions fixed by the territorial authority and not limited to the minimum standards in the relevant District Plan and/or did not require the respondent to obtain the minimum dimensions acceptable to the territorial authority – whether Court of Appeal erred in determining the width of easement in question “of no real moment” – whether applicant able to insist on conditions that limit respondent’s use of easementCA 99/05 24 August 2006
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicants are to pay the respondent costs in the sum of $2,500 plus disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.

13 November 2006

Case name
Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind v Auckland City Council
Case number
SC 76/2006
Summary
Civil – local government – levying of rates – Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 1, Part 1, cl 5(e), Part 1 – whether relevant rating exemption does not apply to land owned by applicant for its purposes and not acquired or held as a gift but which is nevertheless let to commercial tenants – whether exemption should be construed to indicate and/or be applied in light of inferred legislative purpose that land not directly used to provide services of charitable nature should be rateable – whether the meaning of “except as an endowment” is relevant to the application of the rating exemption and informs the policy underpinning the exemption – whether anomalies arising from natural and ordinary interpretation of exemption should be left to Parliament to address (if at all).CA 171/05 29 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. 27 November 2006 _____________________ Appeal dismissed.
Costs to respondent $15,000 plus disbursements. 2 August 2007
Case name
Richard Roberts v The Queen
Case number
SC 79/2006
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against conviction – whether failure by trial counsel to call evidence from applicant gave rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice – whether failure by appellate counsel to raise the above failure by trial counsel as a point of appeal gave rise to a substantial miscarriage of justice – whether the Supreme Court should entertain these grounds of appeal given they were not raised in the Court of Appeal – whether the Supreme Court should receive fresh evidence concerning these grounds of appeal. CA 446/05 14 September 2006
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 
7 December 2006
Case name
Anthony Arbuthnot v Chief Executive of the Department of Work and Income
Case number
SC 82/2006
Summary
Civil – applicant was overpaid benefits – whether Court of Appeal erred in confusing review and appeal provisions under statute with administrative power of review – whether the decision of the Benefit Review Committee on the status of the beneficiary could only be reviewed by the Chief Executive on the basis of new information or some change in circumstance – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that it would not be an abuse of process for the Chief Executive to be able to put an issue decided in the beneficiary’s favour before the Authority at the time the beneficiary appealed other issues – whether a decision of the BRC varying a decision of the Chief Executive creates an estoppel against the Chief Executive – whether the Court of Appeal erred in not distinguishing between the decision of the Chief Executive, and the decision as modified by the Authority. CA  256/05  3 October  2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. 8 March 2007 _______________________ Appeal dismissed. Cost reserved.
19 July 2007
Case name
David James Thomas Watt v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2006
Summary
Summary Criminal – appeal against conviction – criminal breach of trust – applicant was trustee and executor of an estate – applicant billed estate and paid himself out of estate funds – finding that applicant knew he was not entitled to be paid – sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment – whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding conviction. CA 131/06 17 October 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

30 July 2007

Leave judgment  - leave dismissed
Case name
Nikala Janice Taylor v Christopher Dean Jones
Case number
SC 88/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – applicant implicated in abduction of child – orders made against applicant by High Court pursuant to application under Habeas Corpus Act 2001 – standard of proof applicable in ordering that person in shoes of applicant release another person from detention – whether sufficient evidential basis to justify making of orders – whether Court of Appeal erred in disclaiming jurisdiction to hear appeal against orders on basis that they were interim rather than final – whether Court of Appeal erred in affirming High Court’s direction for oral examination of applicant – adequacy of interim orders made by Court of Appeal to protect applicant against self-incrimination.CA 2302006 10 November 2006
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
6 December 2006
__________________________________
Appeal allowed. Orders made in the High Court quashed. Supression of name to lapse at 9 am on 7 December 2006. Costs reserved. Reasons to be given later.