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
Media 1 Limited v N W Shanks and Wilson McKay Trustee Company and ors
Case number
SC 16/2008
Summary
Civil – validity of termination of lease – whether notice of termination of lease was sufficiently clear and unambiguous as to how and when the termination would operate and what steps were required by the other party to prevent the termination – whether the Court of Appeal was right to assume that the phrase in the notice “pursuant to its rights” was an invocation of the termination provisions of the lease – whether the reaction of the recipient and their legal advisors to the notice was relevant to the interpretation of the validity of the notice.[2008] NZCA 77 CA292/07 5 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondent.
7 May 2008
Case name
Ahmad Zanzoul v The Queen
Case number
SC 17/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – applicant convicted after pleading guilty pursuant to s 153A of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 on an information laid under s 31(1)(f)(ii) of the Passports Act 1992 – sentenced to 15 months imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention – whether the conviction and sentence is a nullity for want of legal certainty or vagueness of the provisions dealing with the indictable and summary jurisdiction for penalty purposes – alternatively, whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by constructing the legislation to the applicant’s detriment in failing to apply the lesser penalty where the legislation was “complex and confusing” – additionally, whether admissions were obtained without informing the applicant of his rights not to incriminate himself, to silence, and to obtain a lawyer in breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether, under art 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations read in conjunction with the Refugee Convention, the applicant should, as a refugee claimant, have been provided on detainment with advice by a consular or appropriate international official – whether a Hansen declaration should be made with regard to this issue – whether the applicant’s hearing before the Refugee Status Appeals Authority was unlawful for lack of independence and impartiality on the principles of Charanjit Singh v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] ScotCS 342 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in fact and law in finding and taking into account that there is nothing linking the appellant’s possession of a false Australian passport with his claim for refugee status – whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in taking into account that the applicant was not in the situation of many refugee claimants – application for name suppression.CA 297/06 6 December 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ZANZOUL v R SC 17/2008 [10 June 2008] (PDF, 25 KB)
Additional document
ZANZOUL v R SC 17/2008 [9 May 2008] (PDF, 14 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
10 June 2008
Case name
Shaun Antony King v The Queen
Case number
SC 18/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal by way of case stated – Juries Act 1981 – applicant challenges the legality and fairness of jury-vetting, under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Privacy Act 1993 and the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 – whether controls should operate over prosecution use of information including, but not limited to, the criminal history of a potential jury member – whether disclosure by the prosecution to the defence should be required in relation to such information.[2008] NZCA 79 CA 207/2007 10 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave granted
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [25 July 2008] (PDF, 48 KB)
Transcript
Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Queen
Case number
SC 19/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – charges of escape from lawful custody and unlawful detention – whether the Court of Appeal was correct in finding in R v Carolyn Rochelle Taylor [2007] NZCA 318 that the applicant was at the time in lawful custody – whether the Trial Judge was correct to reject a plea under s 357 Crimes Act 1961 for previous acquittal on the unlawful detention charge - whether the sentence was excessive, or a minimum term appropriate.CRI 2005 085 5744 19 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TAYLOR v R SC 19/2008 [26 May 2008] (PDF, 17 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
26 May 2008.
Case name
Alan Ivor Greer v The Queen
Case number
SC 20/2008
Summary
Summary Criminal appeal – bail – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to refuse the appellant’s application for bail pending hearing of his appeal against sentence – whether undue delay in processing the appeal has hindered the appellant’s ability to prepare for his appeal against sentence – whether inadequate facilities available to the appellant as a sentenced prisoner have prevented the appellant from adequately preparing for the appeal.[2008] NZCA 90 CA 179/06 17 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
greervqueenbail 000 (PDF, 13 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
9 May 2008
Case name
Big River Paradise Limited v Robin Lance Congreve and others
Case number
SC 21/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal - restrictive covenants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the applicant’s proposed development would be a subdivision for the purpose of a restrictive covenant - whether the word “subdivision” in the restrictive covenant should be interpreted with reference to the definition of “subdivision of land” in the Resource Management Act 1991 – whether restrictive covenants should be interpreted purposively – whether the Court of Appeal correctly determined the purpose of the restrictive covenant in this case[2008] NZCA 78 CA 135/06 9 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
20 June 2008.
Case name
Carolyn Rochelle Taylor v The Queen
Case number
SC 22/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction on three charges of unlawful possession of airgun, assisting escape from lawful custody and kidnapping – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding prisoner Appellant assisted to escape (AT) was in lawful custody.[2007] NZCA 318 CA 40/07 27 July 2007
Dates
Notice of abandonment being lodged the application for leave to appeal dismissed.
26 June 2008
26 June 2008
Case name
Mark Moncrieff Stevens and others v Premium Real Estate Limited
Case number
SC 23/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Breach of fiduciary duty and Fair Trading Act 1986 – Damages – Advertising and sale of residential property where absence full disclosure by agent to principal of close, ongoing commercial relationship with purchaser – Whether Court of Appeal erred in quantification of damages assessment, including whether correct measure of loss includes profit made by third party (rather than fiduciary) as result of breach of fiduciary duty.[2008] NZCA 82 CA 31/07 11 April 2008
Result
Leave to appeal and cross appeal granted.
29 July 2008
________________________
The appellants’ appeal is allowed.The respondent’s appeal is dismissed. The respondent is ordered to pay the appellants damages of $659,813 and to repay to them the commission of $67,050. The judgment sums will bear interest at 7% per annum from 16 July 2004 (the date of settlement).The appellants are awarded costs in this Court of $15,000 and costs in the Court of Appeal of $6,000, together in each case with their reasonable disbursements as fixed by the respective Registrars if not otherwise agreed between the parties.
6 March 2009
29 July 2008
________________________
The appellants’ appeal is allowed.The respondent’s appeal is dismissed. The respondent is ordered to pay the appellants damages of $659,813 and to repay to them the commission of $67,050. The judgment sums will bear interest at 7% per annum from 16 July 2004 (the date of settlement).The appellants are awarded costs in this Court of $15,000 and costs in the Court of Appeal of $6,000, together in each case with their reasonable disbursements as fixed by the respective Registrars if not otherwise agreed between the parties.
6 March 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 13 November 2008 (PDF, 254 KB)
Media Releases
- media release (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Recall judgment
Case name
Kevin Anthony Lenaghan v The Queen
Case number
SC 24/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – possessing a substance with the intention of using it to produce or manufacture a controlled drug - whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that there was adequate evidence to support the jury’s conclusion of possession of a substance – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge gave adequate jury directions.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LENAGHAN v R SC 24/2008 [21 July 2008] (PDF, 16 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
21 July 2008
21 July 2008
Case name
Ester Slee v Michael Ian Slee
Case number
SC 25/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – family law – Child Support Act 1991 – departure order providing for child support – whether the judgement of the Family Court on 29 September 2005 materially changed the position as determined by its judgment of 18 August 2004 – accordingly, whether the appellant’ s challenge to the retrospective effect of a departure order made by the Family Court on 18 August 2004 was out of time – whether there is an ability to extend time for appeal - if the appeal is not out of time, whether the Family Court’s assessment of the child support for the year ended 31 March 2003 was correct under the Child Support Act 1991.[2008] NZCA 85 CA 205/07 18 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SLEE V SLEE SC 25/2008 [14 August 2008] (PDF, 15 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondent.
14 August 2008
Page 206 of 244