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.

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
Robert Frank Terry v Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 49/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing - Sentencing Act 2002 – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – High Court quashed conviction for failure to complete required hours of work and held the existing sentence of community work imposed remained - Whether the High Court lacked jurisdiction to re-impose sentence originally imposed by the District Court after point in time – Whether the High Court failed to consider relevant law.CRI 2010 418 01   23 April 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Terry v Department Of Corrections SC 49/2010 [16 July 2010] (PDF, 9 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

16 July 2010.
Case name
PT v The Queen
Case number
SC 50/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the evidence of a general practitioner was relevant and substantially helpful under ss 7 and 25 of the Evidence Act 2006 respectively; whether the trial judge erred in his directions to the jury and if so, whether the errors amount to a miscarriage of justice. [2010] NZCA 151   CA 604/2009   27 April 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
sc 50 2010 pt v the queen leave judgment (PDF, 46 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

20 July 2010
Case name
Vupul Romik Sharma v The Queen
Case number
SC 51/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Crimes Act 1961 – Abduction and sexual violation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge did not need to direct the jury on the issue of intoxication[2009] NZCA 540   CA 244/2009   17 November 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SHARMA v R SC 51/2010 [13 August 2010] (PDF, 10 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

13 August 2010.
Case name
GE Custodians v Bruce Leonard Bartle and Dorothy Judith Bartle and others
Case number
SC 52/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the credit contracts entered into by the appellant and the respondents were oppressive in terms of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003; Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of “oppression”; whether it is possible for a contract to be oppressive despite independent legal advice being received: whether knowledge of a third party could be attributed to the appellant in the absence of a relationship of agency.[2010] NZCA 174   CA 627/2009   6 May 2010
Result
Leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground of appeal is whether the credit contracts were oppressive in terms of the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003.
5 August 2010
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside. The case is remitted to the High Court for determination of issues reserved by that Court for further consideration.  The appellant is awarded costs in this Court against the first and second respondents of $25,000 together with its reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar. The costs order made by the Court of Appeal is reversed.  
3 December 2010
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
GE CUSTODIANS v BARTLE AND ORS SC 52/2010 [5 August 2010] (PDF, 49 KB)
Substantive judgment
GE CUSTODIANS v BARTLE AND BARTLE AND ANOR SC 52/2010 [3 December 2010] (PDF, 200 KB)
Transcription

Hearing date : 20 and 21 October 2010

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Case name
Jeremy William Mataira v The Queen
Case number
SC 53/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Assault – Appeal against convictions based on alleged misconduct at trial – Whether Appellant denied ability to mount a credible appeal to Court of Appeal because evidence of alleged misconduct at trial unavailable.[2010] NZCA 190   CA 162/2009   14 May 2010
Dates

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

13 August 2010.
Case name
Alan Parekura Torohinga Haronga v Waitangi Tribunal and others
Case number
SC 54/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Judicial Review – Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 – Whether Appellant should be granted urgent Waitangi Tribunal remedies hearing in respect of application for resumption of Crown forest land subject to current settlement negotiations – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that Crown Forests Assets Act 1989 did not substantively alter Waitangi Tribunal’s role in relation to making of binding recommendations in respect of Crown forest land – Whether Court of Appeal failed to take into account that circumstances meant Tribunal did not exercise its discretion and Appellant could never have gained remedies hearing – Whether Court of Appeal failed to take into account right of smaller claimants to seek a remedy under s 8HB of Treaty of Waitangi Act.[2010] NZCA 201   CA 73/2010   19 May 2010
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground is whether in making his decision of 21 October 2009 in Wai 1489 to decline an urgent remedies hearing, the presiding Judge in the Waitangi Tribunal erred in law.
10 August 2010
___________________________
A The appeal is allowed and the determination of Judge  Clark is quashed. B The matter is remitted to the Waitangi Tribunal with the direction that it must proceed urgently to hear the claim. C The second respondent must pay the appellant costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.  Costs in the Court of Appeal and High Court are to be fixed by those Courts
Transcripts
Media Releases
Substantive judgment
HARONGA v WAITANGI TRIBUNAL AND ORS SC 54/2010 [19 May 2011] (PDF, 469 KB)
Case name
Avowal Administrative Attorneys Limted and Nikytas Nicholas Petroulias v The District Court at North Shore and The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 55/2010
Summary
Civil – Judicial review - Powers of the Commissioner of Inland Revenue to obtain information under the Tax Administration Act 1994 – That the Court of Appeal erred in failing to require that inspection of documents be necessary and relevant before the CIR may access them – That the Court of Appeal erred in finding no scope to interpret “book or document” in s16 of the TAA narrowly – That the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the CIR had an obligation to disclose the information obtained to the Australian Tax Office.[2010] NZCA 183   CA 73/2009  11 May 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
AVOWAL ADMINISTRATIVE ATTORNEYS AND ANOR v THE DISTRICT COURT AT NORTH SHORE AND ANOR SC 55/2010 [16 August 2010] (PDF, 48 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

Applicants must pay 2nd respondents cost of $3,000 plus disbursements as fixed by the Registrar.

16 August 2010.
Case name
Nathan Stanley Gedye v Colin Robert South, Diane Lee South and Richard James Bureel as Trustees of the South Family Trust
Case number
SC 56/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Building Act 1991 – Alleged breach of vendor warranty for compliance with the Act – interpretation of limitation defence in s 91(2) of the Act – the Court of Appeal held the “act or omission on which the proceedings are based” to be the giving of the contractual warranty rather than the building work itself – the 10 year limitation period in s 91(2) therefore did not bar the respondent’s claim – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding s 91(2) inapplicable[2010] NZCA 207   CA 567/2009   20 May 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
GEDYE v SOUTH, SOUTH AND BURRELL (AS TRUSTEES OF THE SOUTH FAMILY TRUST) SC 56/2010 [5 August 2010] (PDF, 12 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

5 October 2010.
Case name
KLB v The Queen
Case number
SC 57/2010
Summary
Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ruling that a statement made by the Applicant to the police was admissible as evidence; whether the statement was extracted by oppression in breach of s 29 of the Evidence Act 2006.  [2010] NZCA 222   CA 144/2010   31 May 2010
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

13 July 2010.
Case name
P v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 58/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Duty of Care – Accident Compensation Act 2001 – Appellant alleges mental injury/PTSD as a result of sexual assault and threats/intimidation during employment with Royal New Zealand Navy – Whether ACC bar applies to mental injury suffered as a result of threats and intimidation – Whether damage materially contributed to Appellant’ s mental injury –Whether non-delegable duty of care or fiduciary duty owed to the Appellant – Whether case merits award of exemplary or vindicatory damages – Whether case should be heard without prior appeal to the Court of Appeal in order for Supreme Court to hear case at the same time as another proposed appeal from W & W v Attorney-General [2010] NZCA 139.Civ 2006 485 874    16 June 2010
Dates

Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.

30 June 2010.
Page 184 of 244