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
Fan Li v The Queen
Case number
SC 120/2010
Summary
[2009] NZCA 445  CA 38/2009   30 September 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FAN v R SC 120/2010 [5 April 2011] (PDF, 45 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

5 April 2011.
Case name
Weruma Mohi Walker v The Queen
Case number
SC 121/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against sentence –guilty plea to one count of aggravated robbery and one count of unlawful detention – whether sentence is manifestly excessive.[2010] NZCA 534  CA 336/2010   19 November 2010 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WALKER v R SC 121/2010 [9 March 2011] (PDF, 49 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

9 March 2011.
Case name
Keith Allenby v Terri Hannan and Middlemore Hospital of Counties Manukau District Health Board
Case number
SC 122/2010
Summary
Civil – Negligence – Accident Compensation Act 2001 – Application for pre-trial ruling– Whether unwanted pregnancy occasioned by failure of doctor to adequately perform sterilisation (tubal ligation) procedure covered by s 20(2)(b) of Accident Compensation Act as personal injury caused by medical misadventure – Whether application for pre-trial ruling can be the subject of “leapfrog” appeal to Supreme Court without prior judgments of High Court or Court of Appeal.[Civ 2010 404 3260  Priestley J  31 August 2010
Dates
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.
Case name
Henry David Levin and Barry Philip Jordan v Patrick Ikiua, Kenti Apa, Tess Apa, Mark Crosbie, Andrew David Smith.
Case number
SC 123/2010
Summary
Civil – Liquidators’ right under s 298 of the Companies Act 1993 to recover property which a liquidated company has disposed of to certain entities – Whether the company must have had a proprietary interest in the property – Whether s 298 applies only to transactions where the directors are duty bound to obtain fair value in return for the disposition of property – Whether the company had legitimately transferred its assets – Whether the directors of the company had breached their duties by disposing of all profits.[2010] NZCA 509 CA 508/2009  12 November 2010
Dates
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.
Case name
Saxmere Company Limited v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Limited
Case number
SC 124/2010
Summary
[2010] NZCA 513 CA 784/2009  17 November 2010
Dates

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

9 March 2011.
Case name
OH v The Queen
Case number
SC 125/2010
Summary
Criminal – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – validity and scope of search warrants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the validity of search warrants issued under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act can be used to authorise surveillance on private land – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – unreasonable search and seizure – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the police in this case did not breach s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Evidence Act 2006 – admissibility of evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its undertaking of the s 30 balancing exercise and in concluding that the evidence in dispute was admissible at trial[2010] NZCA 528  CA 825/2009  19 November 2010
Result
The appeal allowed in part.  The video surveillance evidence (other than footage of vehicles on Reid Road) is inadmissible against those appellants.  All the other disputed evidence is admissible against them. 2 September 2011.
Leave judgment - leave granted
HAMED and OTHERS v R SC 125/2010 and Others [24 March 2011] (PDF, 84 KB)
Substantive judgment
HAMED v R SC 125/2010 [2 September 2011] (PDF, 551 KB)
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

The approved grounds are whether the challenged evidence was lawfully obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 or was, alternatively, properly admissible pursuant to s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.

25 March 2011
Hearing

3 and 4 May 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
Christopher Ian Freakley v The Queen
Case number
SC 126/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against sentence – whether the sentencing judge should have taken into account the fact the applicant was found not guilty on a count of aggravated robbery.[2010] NZCA 497  CA 26/2010  29 October  2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FREAKLEY v R SC 126/2010 [7 March 2011] (PDF, 45 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

7 March 2011.
Case name
Karen McGrath v Accident Compensation Corporation
Case number
SC 127/2010
Summary
Civil – Accident Compensation Act 2001 – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that the ACC had a reasonable basis under s 110(3) Accident Compensation Act to require the Applicant to undergo a vocational independence assessment.[2010] NZCA 535  CA 302/2009  19 November  2010
Result
A  The application for leave to appeal is granted.
B  The approved ground is whether the Court of Appeal in [2010] NZCA 535 has correctly interpreted and applied s 110(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001.
 8 March 2011
___________________
A The appeal is allowed and the notice given on 9 September 2008 by the Accident Compensation Corporation is quashed.
B Costs are reserved.  Counsel may file memoranda if necessary.
7 July 2011
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
MCGRATH v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION SC 127/2010 [8 March 2011] (PDF, 7 KB)
Substantive judgment
McGRATH v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION SC 127/2010 [7 July 2011] (PDF, 145 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : 2 June 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young J.
Case name
TWI and others  v The Queen
Case number
SC 128/2010 ; 129/2010; 130/2010; 131/2010; 132/2010; 133/2010/ 135/2010; 138/2010; 139/2010
Summary
Criminal – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – validity and scope of search warrants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the validity of search warrants issued under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act can be used to authorise surveillance on private land – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – unreasonable search and seizure – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the police in this case did not breach s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Evidence Act 2006 – admissibility of evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its undertaking of the s 30 balancing exercise and in concluding that the evidence in dispute was admissible at trial[2010] NZCA 497  CA 809/2009  19 November  2010
Result
A The appeals of Mr Tame Iti, Mr Te Rangiwhiria Kemara, Mr Urs Signer and Ms Emily Bailey are dismissed. B The appeals of the other appellants are allowed in part.  The video surveillance evidence (other than footage of vehicles on Reid Road) is inadmissible against those appellants.  All the other disputed evidence is admissible against them.
2 September 2011.
Leave judgment - leave granted
HAMED and OTHERS v R SC 125/2010 and Others [24 March 2011] (PDF, 84 KB)
Supreme court decision
HAMED v R SC 125/2010 [2 September 2011] (PDF, 551 KB)
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

The approved grounds are whether the challenged evidence was lawfully obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 or was, alternatively, properly admissible pursuant to s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.

25 March 2011
Hearing

3 and 4 May 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
Evgeny Orlov v Anza Distributing NZ Limited and USG Interiors Pacific Limited
Case number
SC 136/2010
Summary
Civil – costs – whether Court of Appeal with jurisdiction to strike out appeal against costs judgment in circumstances where no dispute between parties and main purpose of appeal to challenge legal basis of decision and factual findings that counsel had failed to reach minimum standard of competence that should be attained by officers of the Court – whether appropriate for appellant to pay for an amicus to act as contradictor – whether Court of Appeal decision contravened appellant’s rights under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights; and United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.   [2010] NZCA 536  CA 683/2009   22 November  2010
Additional document
sc 136 2010 orlov v anza fees review (PDF, 21 KB)
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ORLOV v ANZA DISTRIBUTING (NZ) LIMI TED & ORS SC 136/2010 [29 March 2011] (PDF, 69 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed. No order for costs.

29 March 2011.
Page 191 of 244