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
The Trustees of Te Huria Matenga Wakapuaka Trust v The Minister of Conservation and others
Case number
SC 17/2009
Summary
Land Law – Maori Customary Title – Ownership of Land – land subject to both a Native Land Court Certificate of Title and a Land Transfer Act title – whether the Land transfer Act Certificate of Title takes priority – Interpretation of inconsistent Certificates of Title.[2008] NZCA 564 CA 18/2008 18 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
6 April 2011
6 April 2011
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Transcription
Case name
Ports of Auckland Limited v Southpac Trucks Limited
Case number
SC 18/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Carriage of Goods Act 1979 – Statutory Interpretation – Proper meaning of s 6 “not liable as such” – Whether Court of Appeal erred in its application of the statutory exemption conferred in s 6 of the Carriage of Goods Act – Whether Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that fork lift operator negligently driving into truck and causing $60,000 damage was exempt from liability under s 16(2) of the Carriage of Goods Act with the consequence that Ports of Auckland Ltd could not be held vicariously liable.[2008] NZCA 573 CA 355/2007 22 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
3 April 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed and the judgment of the High Court is restored. Appellant awarded costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements. Costs order in the Court of Appeal is reversed.
30 October 2009
3 April 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed and the judgment of the High Court is restored. Appellant awarded costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements. Costs order in the Court of Appeal is reversed.
30 October 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 October 2009 (PDF, 150 KB)
Media Releases
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Securities Registry Limited and another v Virginia Gomes
Case number
SC 19/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – loan agreement conditional on payment of a sum by a third party to the debtor – sum paid to the debtor by way of setoff against the debtor’s debt to the third party – setoff occurred without the knowledge of the lender – debtor’s accountant represented to the lender that the sum was “being held” by debtor – whether negligent misstatement – whether misleading or deceptive conduct under s 9 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 [2008] NZCA 567 CA 355/2007 19 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to respondent.
28 April 2009
28 April 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Edin Bozz Boskovic v The Queen
Case number
SC 20/2009
Summary
Criminal – Sexual violation by rape – Appeal against conviction - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the alleged incompetence of trial counsel did not cause a miscarriage of justice – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial Judge’s ruling on alibi evidence was correct.CA 33/2006 12 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
3 June 2009
3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BOSKOVIC v R SC 20/2009 [3 June 2009] (PDF, 12 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Robert John Erwood v Janet Maxted and others and The Official Assignee
Case number
SC 21/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – stay of advertising of bankruptcy.[2009] NZCA CA 545 /2008 17 February 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
27 February 2009
27 February 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Westpac Banking Corporation v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 22/2009
Summary
Tax Law – Whether judicial review of a Commissioner’s decision is inconsistent with the statutory scheme of challenge under Part VIIIA of the Tax Administration Act 1994; whether judicial review amounted to a collateral attack on the Commissioner’s decision; Whether exceptional circumstances existed that resulted in an amended assessment falling outside the scope of s 109 and s 114 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 (the statutory scheme of challenge) and thereby justifying judicial review; Whether conscious or deliberate maladministration are the only circumstances in which an assessment may be invalid; Whether there was a breach of a legitimate expectation held by Westpac; Whether the Commissioner’s amended assessment was not an honest appraisal or a genuine exercise of judgment; Whether the Commissioner’s amended assessment was the product of an abuse of power; Whether the Commissioner’ s procedure applied in coming to an amended assessment was consistent with the law; Whether a correct assessment, reached by an improper process, is valid.[2009] NZCA 24 CA 624/07 20 February 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 plus reasonable disbursements to the respondent.
8 April 2009
8 April 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Ian Laywood and Gary Rees v Holmes Construction Wellington Limited
Case number
SC 23/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Construction Contracts Act 2002 – Statutory Interpretation – Enforcement of adjudicator’s determination by entry as judgment – Extent to which Construction Contracts Act judgments are to be treated differently as matter of law to non-Construction Contract Act judgments vis-à-vis Insolvency legislation – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding ss 73 and 74 of the Construction Contracts Act created a special regime for the enforcement of adjudicators’ determinations that is not subject to s 29 of the District Courts Act 1947 and that entry of a judgment pursuant to ss 73 and 74 was a final judgment for the purposes of s 19(1) of the Insolvency Act 1967 – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding principles of natural justice and s 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 did not entitle the Appellants to an oral hearing (as opposed to judgment being delivered on the papers).[2009] NZCA 35 CA 83/2008 25 February 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to respondent. 15 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Govind Prasad Saha v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 24/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – application of the foreign investment fund rules contained in Part CG of the Income Tax Act 1994 – the appellant was a partner in a firm that sold its consultancy business to a French company – as part of the sale transaction the appellant agreed to work for the consultancy business for five years from the date of settlement – as part of the sale transaction the appellant received a package of shares in the French company to be gradually released to him over a five year period – the appellant ended his employment in the consultancy business prematurely – the resulting deed of settlement provides that 50% of the unreleased shares will be transferred to the French company – whether the transfer of shares is a “disposition” for the purpose of s CG 23(5) – whether the appellant derived a gain in kind from the transfer of shares for the purposes of s CG 14(2)[2009] NZCA 76 CA 617/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal is granted. 25 May 2009
______________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to respondent.
23 July 2010
______________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to respondent.
23 July 2010
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Hearing date : 27 October 2009
Chief Justice, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Wilson JJ.
Case name
The Commerce Commission v Carter Holt Harvey Limited
Case number
SC 25/2009
Summary
Civil – Strike-out – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that for the purposes of s 43(5) of the Fair Trading Act 1986 the relevant knowledge was that of both the Commission and the person who had suffered loss – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that knowledge of “likelihood of loss or damage” was sufficient for time to start running for a claim for relief under s 43(2)(c) and (d) of the Fair Trading Act – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to conflate discovery of a breach of the Fair Trading Act with discovery of loss or damage – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that only a minimal amount of knowledge is required to set the limitation period running under s 43 of the Fair Trading Act – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Commission discovered the loss or damage before the limitation date[2009] NZCA 40 CA 316/2007 27 February 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
25 May 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed. The order of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the application to strike out the appellant’s proceeding is dismissed. The respondent is ordered to pay the appellant for its costs in this Court the sum of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar. The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is reversed and the costs order made in the High Court is reinstated.
27 November 2009
25 May 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed. The order of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the application to strike out the appellant’s proceeding is dismissed. The respondent is ordered to pay the appellant for its costs in this Court the sum of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar. The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is reversed and the costs order made in the High Court is reinstated.
27 November 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 11 August 2009 (PDF, 372 KB)
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
TFAC Limited, Geoffrey Alan Grisdale and Amanda May Grisdale v Susan Elizabeth David and UAR Limited
Case number
SC 26/2009
Summary
Civil – Fair Trading Act 1986 – Australian home services franchising operation – Applicants entered into a master franchise agreement covering Auckland’s eastern suburbs with the respondents, who owned the New Zealand master franchise – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in fact and law in its finding that the respondents did not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct in breach of s 9 of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overlooking the High Court’s finding that the respondents had breached s 22(1) and (2) of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in treating a particular pleaded misrepresentation as a misrepresentation as to a future matter – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a particular opinion was honestly held by the first respondent and had a reasonable basis – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its finding that even if the respondents had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct the causal link necessary to justify relief under s 43 of the Act was doubtful – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its finding that the respondents were protected from liability by various disclaimer and acknowledgement clauses.[2009] NZCA 44 CA 26/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed, with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
26 May 2009
26 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Page 194 of 244