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
Chala Sani Abdula v The Queen
Case number
SC 80/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal - whether the applicant was denied his right to an interpreter under s 24(g) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; whether the adequacy of evidence called by the defence at trial and the Court of Appeal's refusal of an application to call further medical and scientific evidence gave rise to a miscarriage of justice.[2010]  NZCA 332   28 July  2010
Result

A  The application for leave to appeal is granted.
B  The approved ground of appeal is whether the applicant was denied his right to an interpreter under s 24(g) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

4 November 2010

___________________________________

Appeal dismissed.

1 November 2011
Transcript

Hearing date : 25 March 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young JJ.
Case name
Gary Maui Isherwood v The Queen
Case number
SC 81/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against sentence of preventive detention - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s application for an extension of time for filing an appeal against sentence.[2010]  NZCA 347   3 August  2010
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dimissed.

21 September 2010.
Case name
Churchill Group Holdings Limited and others v Aral Property Holdings Limited and David Leung
Case number
SC 82/2010
Summary
Civil – Conflict of Interest – Whether employment of High Court Judge’s child within the respondent’s firm of solicitors gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias which meant Judge should not have sat or continued to sit on the case – Whether Court of Appeal should accordingly have recalled its judgment dismissing an appeal from the High Court’s decision not to stay the execution of a costs order against the appellant.[2010]  NZCA 335   30 July   2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
CHURCHILL GROUP HOLDINGS LIMITED AND ORS v ARAL PROPERTY HOLDINGS LIMITED AND DAVID LEUNG SC 82/2010 [3 November 2010] (PDF, 30 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed, with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.

3 November 2010
Case name
Neil Martin Clarke v Corey Daniel Watts
Case number
SC 83/2010
Summary
Civil – Security for costs on appeal – Whether the Registrar of the Court of Appeal failed to provide the appellant with information relating to the requirements for a dispensation of costs within time – Whether a miscarriage of justice would be caused by the release of monies held by the High Court in execution of the costs order to the respondent.[2010]  NZCA 322   27 July 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
CLARKE v WATTS SC 83/2010 [7 October 2010] (PDF, 46 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

7 October 2010
Case name
Bruce Benjamin Shepherd v The Queen
Case number
SC 84/2010
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – applicant was convicted on 20 counts of sexual offending against eight complainants –  during re-examination of one complainant the judge intervened to clarify the meaning of an earlier question from counsel for the defence in cross-examination and sought the complainant’s answer – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the questioning did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that particular conduct of the applicant’s counsel at trial did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice .[2010] NZCA 351 CA 105/2009 5 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SHEPHERD v R SC 84/2010 [1 April 2011] (PDF, 10 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

1 April 2011
Case name
Peter Hardie McNamara and Patrick Sturgeon McNamara as Trustees of the PH McNamara Family Trust v Auckland City Council
Case number
SC 85/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondent did not owe a duty of care to the appellant; whether the Court of Appeal erred in not finding that the building certificate issued by a third party was invalid under the Building Act 1991.[2010] NZCA 345 CA 457/2009 3 August 2010.
Result
A          The application for leave to appeal is granted.  
B          The approved grounds are:  Whether a local authority:  (i)         owes a duty of care to purchasers of units in a residential development for which a code compliance certificate was issued by a private certifier which was acting outside of its authority to issue such certificates; and/or  (ii)          was immunised by s 50(3) of the Building Act 1991 against liability in relation to its actions in reliance on such a certificate.
30 November 2010
____________________________
Appeal dismissed.
The appellants are to pay the respondent costs of $25,000 and reasonable disbursements in connection with this appeal, as fixed by the Registrar if necessary.
9 May 2012
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
MCNAMARA AND ORS v AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL SC 85/2010 [30 November 2010] (PDF, 7 KB)
Substantive judgment
MCNAMARA AND ORS v AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL SC 85/2010 [9 May 2012] (PDF, 7 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : 19 April 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young JJ. 
Case name
Ratima James O'Donnell @  Ratima Joseph Osborne v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether guilty plea was entered in error causing a miscarriage of justice.[2010] NZCA 372  CA 179/2008  16 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
O'DONNELL AKA OSBORNE v R SC 86/2010 [10 November 2010] (PDF, 34 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

10 November 2010
Case name
Hi-Gene Limited v Swisher Hygiene Franchise Corporation
Case number
SC 87/2010
Summary
Civil – Arbitration Act 1996 – Respondent sought to register foreign arbitral award made in North Carolina against New Zealand-based appellant in High Court – Appellant not present at arbitration and adjournment refused by arbitrators – Whether recognition and enforcement of award should be refused in New Zealand on grounds appellant unable to present case at arbitration and rules of natural justice breached – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding same high threshold should apply to grounds for refusing recognition or enforcement of foreign arbitral award under r 36(1)(a)(ii) and (1)(b)(ii) of First Schedule to Arbitration Act – Whether Court of Appeal wrong to hold appellant had onus to seek formal decision from arbitrators on adjournment application – Whether Court of Appeal wrong in holding rr 18 and 24(2) had no application to foreign arbitral awards.[2010] NZCA 359  CA 346/2010  9 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HI-GENE LIMITED v SWISHER HYGIENE FRANCHISE CORPORATION SC 87/2010 [3 November 2010] (PDF, 11 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed, with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.

3 November 2010
Case name
The Queen v GKB
Case number
SC 88/2010
Summary
Criminal – Admissibility of previous consistent statements – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that s 35(2) of the Evidence Act 2006 is not engaged until a proposed witness gives evidence at trial – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that s 35(2) of the Evidence Act 2006 is not engaged by reference to an accused’s pre‑trial statement to the police.[2010] NZCA 326  CA 313/2010  27 August 2010.
Result

Appeal allowed.  Decision of the District Court reinstated.

17 December 2010
Hearing

7 December 2010.

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young JJ.
Dates

Leave to appeal is granted.

The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that s 35(2) of the Evidence Act 2006 is only triggered by a challenge to veracity made at trial.

23 September 2010.
Case name
Raylee Patricia Harley v Robert John Erwood and The Official Assignee
Case number
SC 89/2010
Summary
Civil – Official Assignee accepted a proof of debt from the applicant – decision reversed by the High Court whose judgment was upheld in the Court of Appeal – whether the Court of Appeal correctly applied Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd [2010] NZSC 5 in finding that a judgment in favour of the applicant in one set of proceedings was compromised by a consent order in different proceedings – whether s 149(2)(b) of the Law Practitioners Act 1982, which empowers the court to enter judgment for fees, witness expenses and disbursements, is sufficient basis for a proof of debt claim where the Official Assignee acted reasonably.[2010] NZCA 362  CA 261/2009    10 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HARLEY v ERWOOD SC 89/2010 [16 November 2010] (PDF, 46 KB)
Dates

Applications for leave to appeal by Mrs Harley and Mr Erwood are both dismissed.

16 November 2010
Page 187 of 244