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
Westpac New Zealand Limited v Alan John Clark
Case number
SC 67/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Property – Mortgages – Security – Fraud – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding, in effect, that Appellant’ s mortgage secured nothing – Whether Court of Appeal erred in rejecting Appellant’s submission that upon registration of a mortgage, charged property is rendered liable for the mortgage debt (monies advanced in terms of or in reliance upon the mortgage or monies secured by the mortgage) whatever the mortgage debt is established to be by the lender – Whether Court of Appeal erred in rejecting Appellant’s submission that for purposes of determining what monies are secured by a mortgage, there is no difference between an acknowledgment contained in a mortgage of a particular sum lent with a covenant to repay that sum and an acknowledgment of an unparticularised sum (“all monies”) with a covenant to repay those monies – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that a personal covenant to pay contained in a mortgage is independent of the charged created by the mortgage and does not attract indefeasibility on registration – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that the terms of the loan agreement between the Appellant and a fraudster were not incorporated into the registered mortgage – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding Appellant suffered no loss as a result of the Respondent’s breach of undertaking to register the Appellant’ s mortgage “promptly”.[2008] NZCA 346 CA 172/06 5 September 2008
Media Releases
- sc 67 2008 westpac v alan john clark press release (PDF, 88 KB)
Substantive judgment
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is granted.
27 November 2008
Transcript
Case name
Julian Paul Burke and Gillian Elizabeth Burke v Advances Securities Limited
Case number
SC 68/2008
Summary
Civil – Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003, s 13 – Court of Appeal considered that certain evidence operated to rebut the presumption of a consumer credit contract under s 13 – whether Court of Appeal’ s conclusion was supported by the evidence. [2008] NZCA 93 CA 696/07 18 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed, with costs $2,000 to the respondent.
17 November 2008
Case name
APN New Zealand Limited v Simunovich Fisheries Limited and others
Case number
SC 69/2008
Summary
Civil – Defamation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the obligation in s 38 of the Defamation Act 1992 applies to the pleading of a stand alone defence of truth – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the “repetition rule” and the “ conduct rule” apply to pleadings of truth - whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the change in approach to admissibility of hearsay evidence in the Evidence Act 2006 does not affect the applicability of the “repetition rule” to a pleading of truth – was the Court of Appeal wrong to hold that it is not open to a defendant to plead the opinions and statements of third parties in support of a truth defence, or in support of an honest opinion defence.[2008] NZCA 350 CA 447/07 CA 584/07 8 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Television New Zealand Limited v Simunovich Fisheries Limited and others
Case number
SC 70/2008
Summary
Civil – Defamation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the repetition and conduct rules of pleading apply to a defence of truth – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that a defendant may not seek to prove the truth of imputations by reference to the opinions or assertions of others – did the Court of Appeal err in holding that s 38 does not permit third party assertions and opinion to be pleaded for the defence of truth – was the Court of Appeal wrong to find that a defendant is not entitled to rely on third party assertions as publication facts on which a defence of honest opinion is based, but must identify true statements of facts in the publication which may not include the fact that others made allegations or expressed opinions.[2008] NZCA 350 CA 447/07 CA 584/07 8 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
Transcript
Case name
M v The Queen
Case number
SC 71/2008
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against conviction – sexual conduct with a child under 12 years – miscarriage of justice – whether trial judge was correct to rule that the adducing of defence character evidence as to the applicant’s behaviour in relation to children would allow the Crown to adduce evidence regarding the applicant’s conviction for allowing his 14 year old daughter to drive a motor vehicle – whether trial defence counsel should have adduced the character evidence despite the judge’ s ruling – whether the judge would have then been required to give a further good character direction to the jury – [2008] NZCA 358 CA 259/07 10 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
M v R SC 71/2008 [10 December 2008] (PDF, 18 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
10 December 2008
Case name
B and others v Crown Health Financing Agency
Case number
SC 72/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Mental Health – Treatment – Statutory Interpretation – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding all informal patients in psychiatric hospitals were within leave and immunity provisions contained in s 6 of the Mental Health Act 1935 and s 124 of the Mental Health Act 1969 (“leave and immunity provisions”) – Whether, alternatively, Court of Appeal erred in holding leave and immunity provisions apply to all informal patients after 1 April 1972.[2008] NZCA 362 CA 173/07 16 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 December 2008
___________________________
Appeal allowed. Proceedings that were before the Court of Appeal referred back to High Court. Costs $15,000 to appellant, together with reasonable disbursements.
17 September 2009
1 December 2008
___________________________
Appeal allowed. Proceedings that were before the Court of Appeal referred back to High Court. Costs $15,000 to appellant, together with reasonable disbursements.
17 September 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
sc 72 2008 p and b v crown healthfinancing agency (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Geoffrey Martin Smith v The Queen
Case number
SC 73/2008
Summary
Criminal – application for leave to appeal against conviction – applicant convicted of offences against the Tax Administration Act 1994 – nature of intent required by s 143B(1)(f) of the Act – whether s 109 of the Act applies to evidence in a criminal trial – whether the trial Judge misdirected the jury in relation to PAYE, GST, and the impact of certain assessments before them. [2008] NZCA 371 CA 275/2008 17 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SMITH v R SC 73/2008 [12 December 2008] (PDF, 23 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
12 December 2008.
Case name
Xiao Qiong Huang and others v The Minister of Immigration and The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 74/2008
Summary
Civil – Immigration – whether when interpreting domestic law the Court of Appeal failed to take into account relevant considerations, such as international conventions on the Rights of the Child, on Civil and Political Rights and on the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment – whether the Court of Appeal applied the incorrect test of judicial review to a human rights case – whether the Court of Appeal erred in applying the facts to the law under the Wednesbury test.[2008] NZCA 377 CA 262/06 19 September 2008
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted
4 December 2008
Case name
Kay Skelton v The Queen
Case number
SC 75/2008
Summary
Pretrial – change of venue appllicationCriminal appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in the test it applied under ss 379A and 322 of the Crimes Act 1961 in determining, on appeal, whether there ought to be a change of venue of the applicant’s trial – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion on the risk of an unfair trial without a change of venue[2008] NZCA 382 CA 424/2008 22 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SKELTON v R SC 75/2008 [30 October 2008] (PDF, 12 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
30 October 2008
Case name
Igor Alexandrovich Mikitasov v Bernard John Collins
Case number
SC 76/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – extent of right of way for driveway to adjacent properties – whether respondent’s representations prior to the sale of 2 adjacent properties to the appellant included a representation that the right of way granted to one Lot could be used for access to the other– whether Court of Appeal had sufficient information to conclude that the respondent did not make such a representation – whether the uses of the two Lots owned by the appellant, the circumstances of their purchase and the convenience provided by the use of the right of way for both lots are sufficient to support a counterclaim for an interest in land – whether the principle in Wheeldon v Burrows (1879) 12 Ch D 31 of being ‘necessary for reasonable enjoyment’ applies– whether an injunction should have been granted in addition to a declaration – whether the respondent is estopped from strictly enforcing the terms of the right of way.[2008] NZCA 390 CA 211/2008 25 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MIKITASOV v COLLINS SC 76/2008 [4 February 2009] (PDF, 18 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
4 February 2009
Page 211 of 244