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
Ivan Vladimir Joseph Erceg v Balenia Limited
Case number
SC 27/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – alleged contractual breach by the appellant – clause A4(a) of the contract stipulates that the appellant’s former solicitors are to be satisfied that the respondent has clear title to the super-yachts which form the subject of the contract – the appellant’s former solicitors have not certified the respondent’s title to the super-yachts – whether the respondent is required to give notice to the appellant of its intention to rely on his alleged breach – whether the respondent is entitled to sue before making time of the essence for performance of the contract – whether the respondent bears the onus of proving that it would have been able to show clear title to the super-– whether the respondent can treat clause A4(a) as being fulfilled for the purposes of obtaining relief – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to order specific performance of the contract.[2009] NZCA 48  CA 553/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed, with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
27 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Aaron Mark Wi v The Queen
Case number
SC 28/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against convictions for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and assault with intent to injure – Substantial miscarriage of justice – Whether appellant unfairly prejudiced by trial Judge’s ruling precluding appellant from adducing evidence of lack of convictions for violent offending.[2009] NZCA 81  CA 586/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
7 May 2009
_____________________
Appeal dismissed.
27 November 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
 Transcript

Hearing date : 18 August 2009

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and Wilson JJ.

Case name
Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated v Kapiti Coast District Council and Kotuku Parks Limited
Case number
SC 29/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – ss 94A(c) & 93 Resource Management Act 1991 – application for resource consent to subdivide land adjacent to the Waikanae River Estuary Scenic Reserve – Department of Conservation gave written approval to the application – decision taken to proceed to hear the application without notification – Court of Appeal held that the approval of the Department of Conservation did not allow the first respondent to disregard the effects of the application on the Reserve when deciding whether to notify – whether the first respondent is required to consider the effects of the application on the Reserve when making the notification decision under s 93 – whether the first respondent must be “satisfied” that the adverse effects of the activity on the Reserve will be minor – whether the Court of Appeal correctly applied ss 94A(c) & 93[2009] NZCA 73  CA 695/07
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed, with costs of $2,500 to the respondents jointly. 16 June 2009
Case name
Elias Akle v The Commerce Commission
Case number
SC 30/2009
Summary
Civil – Commerce Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 4 is not the repository of the extraterritorial reach of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that proof of personal conduct in New Zealand is not critical to establishing jurisdiction in respect of overseas residents – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that conduct in New Zealand could be attributed or imputed to overseas parties in the absence of a recognised legal basis, or the requirements of s 90 being met – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the application to set aside the protest to jurisdiction against Mr Akle should succeed in the absence of any allegation that he communicated with or directed any New Zealand actor to do any impugned act while the New Zealand actor was overseas.
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
16 June 2009
_____________________________________
It was adjudged that a notice of abandonment having been lodged the appeal is dismissed.
13 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Darin Joseph Gardner v The Queen
Case number
SC 31/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – Applicant convicted of murder, injuring with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and injuring with intent to injure – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant’s trial was fair – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the discharge of only one juror in certain circumstances, rather than two, was fair – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that provocation was not available as a defence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that provocation and defence of another were not material in the applicant’s sentencing.[2009] NZCA 113   CA 665/07
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 16 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
A R Poynter v The Commerce Commission
Case number
SC 32/2009
Summary
Civil – Commerce Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 4 is not an exhaustive statement of the circumstances in which the provisions of the Act apply to overseas conduct – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the conduct of another foreign resident who acted in New Zealand could be attributed to the Appellant so as to treat the Appellant as having acted within New Zealand through that other person – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly imported the jurisdictional reach of conspiracy in s 310 of the Crimes Act 1961 into s 80(1)(f) of the Act.[2009] NZCA 84  CA 257/2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
16 June  2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript

Hearing date : 17 November 2009

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and Wilson JJ.

Case name
K v The Queen
Case number
SC 33/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – convictions for sexual offending and assault – appeal based on conduct of defence counsel and alleged deficiencies in the trial process - whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying R v Condon [2005] 1 NZLR 446 – whether the appellant was denied the right to a fair trial – whether the appellant was denied the right to legal representation – whether the trial judge erred in accepting the report of a forensic nurse and finding the appellant was competent to instruct counsel[2009] NZCA 97   CA 531/07
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused.
19 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Leroy John Barr v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 34/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – whether jurisdiction to order the payment of medical expenses incurred by the Police in administering a blood test against persons convicted of driving with excess blood alcohol. [2009] NZCA 124    CA  700/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
16 June 2009
______________________
Appeal allowed. The order for payment of medical expenses of $102.60 is set aside.  Insubstitution, the appellant is ordered to pay $93 towards medical expenses.
21 October 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript

Hearing date : 8 October 2009

Blanchard. Tipping, McGrath, Wilson, and Anderson JJ

Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Department of Corrections and another.
Case number
SC 35/2009
Summary
Civil – Disciplinary proceedings - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the decision of the Hearing Adjudicator to refer a charge to a Visiting Justice was not subject to s 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly found the decision of the Hearing Adjudicator did not breach natural justice – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 134 of the Corrections Act 2004 does not require a Hearing Adjudicator to provide notice to a prisoner that his or her charge is being referred to a Visiting Justice, or to allow the prisoner the opportunity to be heard on that referral – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Hearing Adjudicator had not taken into account irrelevant circumstances – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that s 134(2)(a) of the Corrections Act does not exclude consideration of a prisoner’ s past disciplinary record.[2009] NZCA 129   CA  318/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
24 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Ian Russell Geary v The Psychologists Board and another
Case number
SC 36/2009
Summary
Civil – cross-examination of witnesses in judicial review proceedings – application by Mr Geary for leave to cross-examine witnesses who had provided affidavits on behalf of the Psychologists Board in a judicial review of decisions of the Board in disciplinary matters concerning Mr Geary – whether the rule imposing a requirement of leave to cross-examine witnesses in applications for judicial review is contrary to statute, and is not a rule that can be made by a Court – whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to re-examine the validity of the rule – whether there was a proper basis for the High Court to deny the plaintiff the ability to cross-examine the first respondent’s witness.[2009] NZCA 134   CA  818/2008  9 April 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed, with costs $2,500 to the first respondent.
24 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed