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.

27 September 2024

Case information summary 2024 (as at 27 September 2024) –  Cases where leave granted (127 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 27 September 2024)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 120 KB)

All years

Case name
Loktronic Industries Limited v Stephen John Diver and others
Case number
SC 32/2012
Summary
Civil Appeal – Tort – Evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its statement of the test for the element of knowledge in the tort of inducing breach of contract – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overturning findings of fact that were open to the trial judge and not plainly wrong – Whether the Court of Appeal imposed a more onerous duty on the appellant in its cross-examination of its witnesses at trial than is consistent with s 92(1) of the Evidence Act 2006. CA  258/2011  [2012] NZCA131
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $1,000 payable to each set of respondents making submissions.

24 July 2012.

Case name
John George Russell v Commissioner of Inland  Revenue
Case number
SC 33/2012
Summary
Civil Appeal – Tax avoidance – Whether the applicant received a fair and impartial hearing – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in its analysis of the evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the overall arrangement established and operated by the applicant had the purpose or effect of tax avoidance – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant was a person affected by the arrangement and that he obtained a tax advantage – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to find that the assessment made by the Commissioner would not be void even if it included income deemed by virtue of s 99(4) of the Income Tax Act 1976 to be the income of someone else.CA  654/2010  [2012] NZCA128
Dates
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant is to pay costs of $5,000 to the respondent Commissioner plus all reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
13 August 2012.
Case name
CAW v The Queen
Case number
SC 34/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Admissibility of evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that while the search of the property should have been brought to the attention of the issuing officer, the failure to do so was not material – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that it would be inappropriate for the Court to make a finding of bad faith or deliberate omission in the absence of such a finding made by the District Court Judge – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the evidence was admissible.CA  710/2011  [2012] NZCA120
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 June 2012.
Case name
Jay Maui Wallace  v The Queen
Case number
SC 35/2012
Summary
Criminal law – Jurisdiction – Whether the courts of New Zealand have jurisdiction to try the applicant. CA  417/2011  [2012] NZCA139
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed
11 July 2012.
Case name
Manukau Golf Club Incorporated v Shoye Venture Limited
Case number
SC 36/2012
Summary
 CA  747/2011  [2012] NZCA154
Result

Leave to appeal is granted.

The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was wrong:

(i) to make no order for costs in respect of the appeal; and
(ii) to give no reasons.

19 July 2012

________________________

The appeal is allowed. 
The respondent must pay to the appellant, with respect to costs in the Court of Appeal, costs of $12,220, plus disbursements of $5,051.73. 
By agreement, no order as to costs in this Court. 

4 December 2012

Transcript

Hearing date : 4 October 2012

McGrath, William Young, Chambers, Glazebrook JJ.

Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v The Solicitor-General
Case number
SC 37/2012
Summary
CA  417/2011  [2012] NZCA139
Result

Leave to appeal is granted. 
The approved ground is whether New Zealand courts have inherent power or jurisdiction to suppress judgments in criminal cases. 

19 July 2012

__________________

Appeal dismissed.
Mr Siemer must  surrender at the Registry of the High Court at Auckland at 9.00 am on Monday 16 July 2013.

 

12 July 2013

Transcripts

Hearing date : 15 November 2012

Hearing date : 14 February 2013

Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young, Chambers  Glazebrook JJ

Case name
KDM v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Admissibility of evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that while the search of the property should have been brought to the attention of the issuing officer, the failure to do so was not material – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that it would be inappropriate for the Court to make a finding of bad faith or deliberate omission in the absence of such a finding made by the District Court Judge – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the evidence was admissible.CA  709/2011  [2012] NZCA120
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 June 2012.
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Michael Richard Heron and others
Case number
SC 39/2012
Summary
Civil Appeal – Procedure – Security for costs – Whether the High Court erred in ordering that the applicant, an undischarged bankrupt, pay security for costs. CIV 2010 404 6880  17 March 2011
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is refused.

The applicant is to pay the First and Second Respondents costs of $2500.00.

18 July 2012.

Case name
K A  v The Queen
Case number
SC 40/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Joinder – Crimes Act 1961, s 345D – The applicant was convicted on a charge of sexual violation – His brother was a co-accused at the same trial in relation to discrete offending – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in fact and law in finding that the trial Judge’s powers under s 345D were validly invoked and exercised. [2012]NZCA 183  CA 274/2011
Dates
Hearing
Case name
RAS  v The Queen
Case number
SC 41/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Prostitution Reform Act 2003, s 22(1) – Whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting s 22(1) as a strict liability offence – Whether Court of Appeal correctly held that search warrants were properly obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 rather than s 30 of the Prostitution Reform Act – Whether Court of Appeal’ s interpretation of the jurisdictional scope of s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act was correct.[2012]NZCA 189   CA 761/2011
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
27 July 2012.