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
Michael Kristian Olsen v The Queen
Case number
SC 152/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in rejecting the applicant’s claim of trial counsel error – Whether fresh evidence undermines the safety of the applicant’s conviction.                   [2016] NZCA 256   CA632/2014
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 2 March 2017
Case name
Kamal Singh v The Queen
Case number
SC 153/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 44 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s 44. CA 197/2016  [2016] NZCA 552
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
24 March 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Oraka Technologies Limited, Oraka Graders Limited and Michael William Schwarz v Napier Tool & Die Limited, Geostel Vision Limited and Paul Daynes and Gordon Robertson
Case number
SC 154/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that compensatory damages for breach of copyright could not be awarded to the applicant.  CA 304/2016   [2016] NZCA 554
Result
A notice of abandonment having been lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.   
20 February 2017
_______________________________
The applicants are jointly and severally liable to pay costs of $750 to the first respondent and $750 to the second and third respondents, that is, $1,500 in total.
26 May 2017
Case name
Duncan John Napier and Sara Ann Napier v Torbay Holdings Limited and Torbay Rest Home Limited
Case number
SC 155/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Restitution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicants were liable for money had and received – s 161 Employment Relations Act 2000 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that an action for negligence did not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Employment Relations Authority.CA 647/2015    [2016] NZCA 608
Result
A notice of abandonment having been filed the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 06 April 2017
Case name
W v The Family Court at North Shore and The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development
Case number
SC 156/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the applicant’ s application for judicial review of a Family Court Minute discharging a restraining order.CIV 2014-404-001670    [2014] NZHC 2483
Result
A The application for an extension of time to appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the second respondent. 17 March 2017
Case name
Lynda Rose Barry v Francis Carlisle
Case number
SC 157/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining an application for specific performance.CA 446/2015    [2016] NZCA 551
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
4 May 2017
Case name
K  v  Immigration and Protection Tribunal and Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Case number
SC 1/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Immigration – Whether the Court of Appeal failed to properly consider the evidence in breach of the Evidence Act 2006 – Whether the Court of Appeal misapplied ss 130 and 131 of the Immigration Act 2009 – Whether it was incorrect to dismiss the proceedings on a summary basis.[2014] NZCA 585 CA  500/214
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 14 May 2015
Case name
Walter Fitikefu v The Queen
Case number
SC 2/2015
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether there has been a miscarriage of justice.[2014] NZCA 99  CA  356/2013
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
10 March 2015
Case name
NR v MR and others 
Case number
SC 3/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal judgment was in breach of the principles of natural justice – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining the debarment application – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining the disclosure application – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its award of costs.[2014] NZCA 623 CA  443/2014, CA 456/2014, CA 522/3014, CA 532/2014.
Result
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014). 
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Trevor John Momo Wilson v The Queen
Case number
SC 4/2015
Summary
Criminal Appeal – “Red Devils” case – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal against conviction – Whether a stay should have been granted.   [2014] NZCA 584 CA   725/2012
Result
A  The application for leave to appeal is granted.
B  The approved questions are:Was R v Antonievic [2013] NZCA 483, [2013] 3 NZLR 806 correctly decided? And, if notDoes this warrant the quashing of the convictions?
26 May 2015
______________
Appeal allowed, convictions quashed. No order for a retrial.
14 December 2015
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted