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.

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
Grant Stanley Nicholls v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 72/2012
Summary
[2012] NZCA 444  CA 566/2011
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant must pay to the respondent costs of $2,500, together with reasonable disbursements, to be fixed, if necessary, by the Registrar.

14 December 2012
Case name
Barry Raymond Whitelaw v The Queen
Case number
SC 73/2012
Summary
Criminal appeal – Appeal against sentence – Whether the appellant’ s sentence of two years, five months’ imprisonment was excessive – Whether the uplift of nine months applied to the appellant’s sentence to take account of his previous offending was in breach of the prohibition against double jeopardy contained in s 26 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. [2012] NZCA 438  CA 359/2012
Dates
Hearing
Case name
Mars New Zealand Limited v Roby Trustees Limited
Case number
SC 74/2012
Summary
Civil – Intellectual Property– Trademarks – Trade Marks Act 2002, s 17(1)(a) and s 25(1)(b) and (c) – whether the Court of Appeal failed adequately to consider the ambit of the reputation in Mars’ “ OPTIMUM” brand in determining whether registration of Roby Trustees’ “Optimise Pro” brand would be likely to cause confusion for the purposes of s 17(1)(a) – whether the Court of Appeal erred by equating its test under s 17(1)(a) with those under s 25(1)(b) and (c) – whether the Court of Appeal incorrectly determined the principles applicable to fair and notional use and imperfect recollection in comparing the two trademarks under s 25(1)(b) – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its analysis of the likelihood of prejudice to Mars’ interests under s 25(1)(c). [2012] NZCA 450  CA 30/2012
Dates

The application for leave is dismissed.

Costs of $2,500 plus reasonable disbursements as fixed by the Registrar are awarded to the respondent.

19 December 2012. 
Case name
West Coast Ent Incorporated v Buller Coal Limited, Soli Energy New Zealand Limited, Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated.
Case number
SC 75/2012
Summary
Civil Appeal – Supreme Court Act 2003, s 14 – Declarations sought in the Environment Court as to whether the effect of the combustion of coal, extracted from particular mining proposals, on climate change is a relevant consideration under s 104(1)(a) of the Resource Management Act 1991 – Matter heard by Environment Court and High Court – All parties agree to an appeal straight to the Supreme Court – Whether there are exceptional circumstances justifying leave to appeal directly to the Supreme Court from the High Court.[2012] NZHC  2156   CIV 2012 409 972
Result
Leave to appeal direct to this Court, against the High Court’s judgment, is granted.  The approved ground of appeal is whether, under s 104(1)(a) of the Resource Management Act 1991, the decision-makers in the consent proceedings were required or able to have regard to the effects on climate change of discharge of greenhouse gases arising from end use of coal that will be extracted if consent is upheld.
28 November 2012
________________
The appeal is dismissed.
Costs are reserved.
19 September 2013
Transcripts
Media Releases
Substantive judgment
WEST COAST ENT INCORPORATED v BULLER COAL LIMITED [2013] NZSC 87 [19 September 2013] (PDF, 410 KB)
Supreme court decision
costs: WEST COAST ENT INCORPORATED v BULLER COAL LIMITED [2013] NZSC 133 [2 December 2013] (PDF, 65 KB)
Case name
Graeme Andrew Waswo v The Queen
Case number
SC 76/2012
Summary
Criminal appeal – Appeal against Conviction – Indecent assault – Sexual violation – Arson – Whether Court of Appeal was incorrect to dismiss appeal – Severance of charges – Inadequate representation by trial counsel – Whether a direction about propensity evidence was required.  [2012] NZCA 461  CA 845/2011
Dates

Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.

4 April 2013.
Case name
Benjamin Izaak Stanley v The Queen
Case number
SC 77/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – jury trials – jury directions – whether trial judges should give a “demeanour direction” in a case where there is a risk that the jury might place weight on the demeanour of a witness as a factor relevant to determining the credibility and reliability of that witness – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that, despite the Crown prosecutor’s comments in closing and the trial Judge’ s summing up, a demeanour direction was not required – whether a miscarriage of justice occurred at the appellant’s trial. [2012] NZCA 462   CA 672/2011
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
7 February 2013.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
STANLEY v R SC 77/2012 [7 February 2013] (PDF, 51 KB)
Case name
Albert Wayne Hunter v The Queen
Case number
SC 78/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether the trial judge erred in not making an inquiry of two jurors whom the applicant said he knew and who may have been prejudicial – Whether the applicant was inadequately represented by counsel – Whether the applicant was unfairly painted as the prime instigator in sentencing – Whether the applicant’s health issues were appropriately brought to the attention of the Court.  [2012] NZCA 147  CA 584/2011
Result
A The application for leave to adduce fresh evidence is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal against conviction is dismissed.
C The application to appeal directly to this Court against his sentence is dismissed.
26  February 2013.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HUNTER v R SC 78/2012 [26 February 2013] (PDF, 52 KB)
Case name
Y v The Queen
Case number
SC 79/2012
Summary
Criminal – indecent act with a child and young person – Crimes Act 1961 ss 132(3); 134(3); and s 2(1B) – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a person who watches and encourages another person to perform an indecent act performs that indecent act “with” that other person for the purposes of s 2(1B) – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to consider the discretionary nature of its power to order a new trial – whether the Court of Appeal erred in not exercising its discretion not to order a new trial in light of the delay, the distress and the relatively low gravity of the offending. [2012] NZCA 458  CA 321/2012
Dates

The application for leave is dismissed.

Costs of $2,500 plus reasonable disbursements as fixed by the Registrar are awarded to the respondent.

19 December 2012.
Case name
Kyung Yup Kim v The Prison Manager, Mt Eden Corrections Facility
Case number
SC 80/2012
Summary
Civil Appeal – Habeas corpus – Applicant remanded in custody until his eligibility for surrender under s 24 of the Extradition Act 1999 has been determined – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by failing to take into consideration the right to life and the right not to be subjected to torture under ss 8 and 9 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by failing to give authorities from New Zealand and the United Nations Human Rights Committee the intensive scrutiny they warranted – Whether the lawfulness of the application to extradite the applicant is a matter capable of summary determination in a habeas corpus application – Whether challenges to the applicant’s status as an “extraditable person” are a matter capable of summary determination in a habeas corpus application.   [2012] NZCA 471  CA 637/2012
Result

Leave to appeal is granted.

The approved ground is whether the Courts below were correct to dismiss the proceeding because the alleged deficiencies in the request to surrender and the application for a provisional warrant were not suitable for determination on a habeas corpus application.

16 November 2012

_____________________________

The appeal is dismissed. No order for costs.

20 December 2012
Transcript
Hearing date : 10 December 2012
Case name
Cameron John Leef v The Queen
Case number
SC 81/2012
Summary
Criminal appeal – Appeal against conviction – Crimes Act 1961, s 134(1) – Having sexual connection with a young person – Evidence Act 2006, s 44 – Whether Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that evidence of complainant’s prior sexual experience was inadmissible – Whether Court of Appeal erred that there was no miscarriage of justice as a result of the admission of inadmissible evidence.[2012] NZCA 567   CA 248/2011
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
14 March 2013.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LEEF v R SC 81/2012 [14 March 2013] (PDF, 57 KB)
Page 170 of 249