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.

8 November 2024

Case information summary 2024 (as at 8 November 2024) –  Cases where leave granted (126 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 8 November 2024)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 116 KB)

All years

Case name
KSC  v The Queen
Case number
SC 26/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury. [2016] NZCA 48  CA 356/2015
Result

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

15 April 2016
Judgment appealed from

[2016] NZCA 48  CA 356/2015 not available
Case name
JBG  v The Queen
Case number
SC 27/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury. [2016] NZCA 48  CA 160/2015
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

____________________

Judgment released                                                                                              

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 dispositon of related trials of Appellants C (SC 23/2016) and L (SC 24/2016). Publication in Law Report or Law Digest permitted.                                                                                                                     

19 June 2017                            
Leave judgment

 not publicly available
Judgment appealed from

 [2016] NZCA 48  CA 160/2015 not available
Case name
JPC  v The Queen
Case number
SC 28/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.[2016] NZCA 48  CA 145/2015 
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

_____________________

Judgment released                                                                                              

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 dispositon of related trials of Appellants C (SC 23/2016) and L (SC 24/2016). Publication in Law Report or Law Digest permitted. 

19 June 2017                            
Leave judgment

not publicly available
Judgment appealed from

[2016] NZCA 48  CA 145/2015 not available
Case name
Anthony Pratt Kaye and Morva Kaye v Norris Ward McKinnon
Case number
SC 29/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondents had not breached duty of care – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondents had not caused the applicants any loss.
[2016] NZCA 32    CA333/2015
Result
A   The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.   
B   The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
15 June 2016
High Court decision
NORRIS WARD MCKINNON v KAYE [2015] NZHC 1025
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ANTHONY PRATT KAYE AND MORVA KAYE v NORRIS WARD MCKINNON [2016] NZSC 66   15 June 2016 (PDF, 81 KB)
Recall judgment
ANTHONY PRATT KAYE AND MORVA KAYE v NORRIS WARD MCKINNON [2016] NZSC 104 [15 August 2016 (PDF, 64 KB)
Judgment appealed from

KAYE V NORRIS WARD MCKINNON [2016] NZCA 32     29 February 2016
Case name
KHW  v The Queen
Case number
SC 30/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining the application for an extension of time to appeal against the applicant’ s sentence on the basis that any causal contribution of early dementia to the applicant’s offending was not substantial. [2016] NZCA 33   CA13/2015
Result
Notice of abandonment lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed. 
10 June 2016
Judgment appealed from

W (CA315/2015) v R [2016] NZCA 33     29 February 2016
Case name
BM v The Queen
Case number
SC 31/2016
Summary
Criminal appeal – Crimes Act 1961, s 195 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding the sentence was not manifestly excessive.[2016] NZCA 53  CA 599/2015
Result
The Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                       20 June 2016                                                                                                            __
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
M(SC 31/2016) v R [2016] NZSC 72     20 June 2016 (PDF, 81 KB)
Judgment appealed from

M (CA559/2015) v R [2016] NZCA 53   9 March 2016
Case name
Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 32/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal incorrectly assessed the applicant’s entitlement under the insurance policy issued by the respondent – Whether the applicant is entitled to relief from the parties’ settlement agreement under s 6 of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.[2016] NZCA 67  CA 400/2015
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited [2016] NZCA 67).
B The approved grounds are:
(a) the nature and extent of the respondent’s liability under the insurance policy; and
(b) the effect of the release.
20 June 2016
____________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Prattley is to pay Vero costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.                                   
6 December 2016
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2015] NZHC 1444 [24 June 2015]
Court of Appeal decision
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZCA 67 [14 March 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LTD v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZSC 70 [20 June 2016] (PDF, 112 KB)
Substantive judgment
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZSC 158 [6 December 2016] (PDF, 378 KB)
Case name
Amanda Adele White and Anne Leoline Emily Freeman v Christopher Maurice Lynch and Stuart Gordon Spence
Case number
SC 33/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal Civil Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the Deputy Registrar’s decision to decline to dispense with security for costs. [2016] NZCA 78   CA 740/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.                 
17 May 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
AMANDA ADELE WHITE v CHRISTOPHER MAURICE LYNCH [2016] NZSC 55    17 May 2016 (PDF, 71 KB)
Judgment appealed from

WHITE v LYNCH [2016] NZCA 78     22 March 2016
HC judgment 
White v Lynch [2015] NZHC 3202   15 December 2015
HC judgment 
White v Lynch [2015] NZHC 1020      14 May 2015
Case name
Yong Xin Chen v The Cornwall Park Trust Board
Case number
SC 34/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of a lease[2016] NZCA 65  CA 645/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Cornwall Park Trust Board Inc v Chen [2016] NZCA 65).

B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:

(i) to hold that the applicant is liable under the lease to pay the upset rental from the date of expiry of the lease until she vacated the property; and

(ii) in interpreting and applying the applicant’s repair obligations under the lease.
4 July 2016 ____________ Notice of abandonment lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.    26 September 2016
High Court decision
THE CORNWALL PARK TRUST BOARD INC v CHEN [2014] NZHC 2465   8 October 2014
Leave judgment - leave granted
YONG XIN CHEN v THE CORNWALL PARK TRUST BOARD INC [2016] NZSC 81     4 July 2016 (PDF, 58 KB)
Judgment appealed from 

THE CORNWALL PARK TRUST BOARD INC v CHEN [2016] NZCA 65    14 March 2016
Hearing

15 November 2016                                                      

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and Blanchard JJ.
Case name
Michael Marino v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 35/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Application for habeus corpus – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of ss 91(1) and 90(2) of the Parole Act 2002.[2016] NZCA 117   CA 129/2016
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Marino v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2016] NZCA 133).  
B The approved question is: Did the Court of Appeal err in its interpretation of ss 90 and 91 of the Parole Act 2002 or in the application of those sections to the position of the applicant?       
6 May 2016
______________
A Mr Marino’s appeal is allowed.  Costs are reserved.
B Mr Booth’ s appeal is dismissed.
22 September 2016
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
MARINO v CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZHC 459 [16 March 2016]
Court of Appeal decision
MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZCA 133 [15 April 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZSC 52 [6 May 2016] (PDF, 13 KB)
Substantive judgment
EDWARD THOMAS BOOTH v R [2016] NZSC 127 [22 September 2016] (PDF, 368 KB)
Supreme court decision
Costs: MICHAEL MARINO v THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS [2016] NZSC 148 [8 November 2016] (PDF, 76 KB)
Page 108 of 250