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
Telecom Mobile Limited v Commerce Commission
Case number
SC 57/2005
Summary
Cellphone marketing - whether the applicant's contractual arrangements are subject to the Door to Door Sales Act - whether the applicant's contractual arrangements had the purpose or effect of preventing the operation of the Act by hiding from consumers the reality as to their true rights of cancellation - summary judgment given by Court of Appeal. CA148/04 25 August 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted. 23 November 2005
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Paul Rodney Hansen v The Queen
Case number
SC 58/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal against conviction - possession of cannabis for supply - burden on accused to rebut presumption of possession for supply - whether accused must rebut presumption on the balance of probabilities or merely raise a reasonable doubt - Misuse of Drugs Act 1975, s 6(6).
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
24 November 2005
___________________________________
Appeal dismissed.
20 February 2007
24 November 2005
___________________________________
Appeal dismissed.
20 February 2007
Media Releases
- hansenpressrelease 000 (PDF, 142 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
HANSEN v R SC 58/2005 [20 February 2007] (PDF, 571 KB)
Transcript
Hearing date : 22 February 2006
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and Anderson JJ.
Substantive judgment
Case name
Donald Eugene Allen v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 60/2005
Summary
Civil appeal - whether the Court of Appeal erred in their interpretation of ss 138B and 89D of the Tax Administration Act 1994 (˜the Act"), which regulate the process which a taxpayer is required to follow if he or she wishes to challenge a default assessment made by a Commissioner under s 106 of the Act - whether the Court was in error in concluding that the Taxation Review Authority had power to strike out the challenge under s 138H of the Act.
CA 204/04 8 September 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
8 December 2005
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Case name
Robert Arthur Felton and Norah Isabel Felton and others v Annette Frances Johnson
Case number
SC 62/2005
Summary
Relationship property agreement between spouses that has the effect of defeating the creditors of either spouse - whether application to avoid agreement must be made within a two-year limitation period – Property (Relationships) Act 1976, s 47(2)CA 40/04 12 September 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
8 December 2005
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript
Case name
Eastern Services Limited v No 68 Limited
Case number
SC 64/2005
Summary
Civil appeal -whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondent's claim was not time-barred by the Limitation Act 1950 or by analogy with that section - whether statutory limitation periods are relevant to the Court's discretion in the exercise of the equitable defence of laches -“ whether the Court of Appeal erred in their statement of the test for laches.CA 173/04 20 September 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
9 December 2005
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Robert John Condon v The Queen
Case number
SC 66/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal - trial judge's refusal to grant adjournment following withdrawal of counsel leading to accused representing himself at trial - accused convicted and sentenced to imprisonment - whether breach of Sentencing Act 2002, s 30(1) or New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 24 - applicant seeking leave to appeal out of timeCA 373/03 21 July 2004
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
27 March 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcription
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Roger Wilson Steele and Christine Lynne Roberts v Eleftarious Serepisos
Case number
SC 68/2005
Summary
Civil appeal – whether the vendor subdivider was entitled to bring the contract to an end or treat it as at an end because the provisions of s 225 of the Resource Management Act 1991 had not been fulfilled within a reasonable time - whether the vendor was obliged to give the purchaser notice of their intention to bring the contract to an end or allow the purchaser an opportunity fulfil the conditions of s 225 of the Act.CA 203/04 12 October 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted to appellant and respondent. 15 February 2006 ______________________________ The appeal is allowed.
The cross-appeal is dismissed.
The orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
In their place we make an order for the entry of judgment in the High Court in favour of the appellants.
The appellants are to have costs in the High Court as fixed by that Court in the light of this judgment, and in the Court of Appeal the appellants are to have costs of $6,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court.
The appellants are to have costs in this Court of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of this Court. 4 September 2006
The cross-appeal is dismissed.
The orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
In their place we make an order for the entry of judgment in the High Court in favour of the appellants.
The appellants are to have costs in the High Court as fixed by that Court in the light of this judgment, and in the Court of Appeal the appellants are to have costs of $6,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court.
The appellants are to have costs in this Court of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of this Court. 4 September 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Jason John Cumming v The Queen
Case number
SC 72/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal - whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding an accused should be allowed to invoke right of self-representation where their decision was "fully informed and deliberate" whether the trial judges summing up and other interventions during the course of the trial led to a miscarriage of justice.CA 43/03 2 November 2005.
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
27 March 2006
_____________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed. New trial ordered.
15 May 2008
27 March 2006
_____________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed. New trial ordered.
15 May 2008
Date of hearing
19 October 2006
Judges
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, Anderson and Gault JJ: substantive hearing: 28 February 2008
Media Releases
- mediarelease sc722005cummingvr 000 (PDF, 87 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
CUMMING V R SC 72/2005 [27 March 2006] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
CUMMING v R SC 72/2005 [15 May 2008] (PDF, 51 KB)
Case name
Waitakere City Council v Estate Homes Limited
Case number
SC 73/2005
Summary
Resource management - whether Court of Appeal erred in answering four questions of law - whether a subdivision consent application can be altered by the local authority, and granted subject to the alterations, as long as no prejudice arises to the applicant, other parties, or public - whether a consent can be granted subject to conditions more favourable than those applied for - whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that construction of road fell within s108(2)(c) RMA - whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that acquisition of centre part of road fell within s322(2)(a) Local Government Act 1974 - whether Court of Appeal erred in sending proceedings back to Environment Court.CA 210/04 11 November 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
4 April 2006
_____________________________
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appeal is referred back to the Environment Court to be determined in accordance with this judgment. Estate Homes must pay the Council costs in the sum of $10,000 plus reasonable disbursements. Costs in the other Courts are to be fixed by those Courts.
19 December 2006
4 April 2006
_____________________________
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appeal is referred back to the Environment Court to be determined in accordance with this judgment. Estate Homes must pay the Council costs in the sum of $10,000 plus reasonable disbursements. Costs in the other Courts are to be fixed by those Courts.
19 December 2006
Transcripts
- Hearing date 11 July 2006 (PDF, 1.3 MB)
Media Releases
- waitakerecitycouncilmediarelease (PDF, 108 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Westfield (New Zealand) Limited and Northcote Mainstreet Incorporated v North Shore City Council and Discount Brands Limited
Case number
SC 4/2004 SC CIV 4/2004
Summary
Civil appeal - resource management - application for consent for non-complying activity - whether a decision to proceed on a non-notified basis is extraordinary - whether the correct standard of review of such a decision is to be in accordance with traditional Wednesbury principles - whether the cautionary approach discussed in Bayley v Manukau City Council (1999) NZLR 568 should be adopted in non-notification decisions - whether there was sufficient material before the Commissioners to enable them to conclude that the effects of the application would be more than de minimis. CA 30/04 14 June 2004.
Result
6 October 2004 Elias CJ; Tipping J Leave to appeal granted.
6 October 2004
________________________________
The appeal is allowed. The order of the High Court is restored. The decisions made by the North Shore City Council (a) on 25 July 2003 not to require notification of the second respondent's resource consent application and (b) on 21 August 2003 granting that application are set aside. Costs in favour of the appellants are to be fixed by the Court following receipt of written submissions.
19 April 2005
6 October 2004
________________________________
The appeal is allowed. The order of the High Court is restored. The decisions made by the North Shore City Council (a) on 25 July 2003 not to require notification of the second respondent's resource consent application and (b) on 21 August 2003 granting that application are set aside. Costs in favour of the appellants are to be fixed by the Court following receipt of written submissions.
19 April 2005
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 - 8 December 2004 (PDF, 685 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Page 66 of 68