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
Kenny Leslie McMillan v The Queen
Case number
SC 87/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Methamphetamine – Admissibility of Evidence – Fair trial – Whether miscarriage of justice established – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge correct to refuse to direct editing of video interview and in refusing to rule text message inadmissible – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding judicial directions able and sufficient to prevent illegitimate prejudice to applicant from admission of disputed evidence[2008] NZCA 431 CA 411/07 22 October 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
5 February 2009
5 February 2009
Case name
Caroline Rangiata AROH v The Queen
Case number
SC 88/2008
Summary
Criminal Appeal - Criminal appeal – importing cocaine and heroin and exporting cocaine – appeal against conviction and sentence – whether Court of Appeal bench was appropriately constituted – miscarriage of justice – whether evidence was fabricated – whether counts should have been severed from that of the appellant’s co-accused – whether judge erred in allowing inadmissable evidence to be used against the appellant.[2008] NZCA 457 CA 113/07 5 November 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
CAROLINE AROH v R SC 88/2008 [30 March 2009] (PDF, 19 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
30 March 2009
Case name
Symphony Group Limited v Vero Liability Insurance Ltd
Case number
SC 89/2008
Summary
Civil – whether an insured defendant may join its insurer to a proceeding as a third party pursuant to Rule 75 of the High Court Rules and resist an application for strike out - whether the Court of Appeal was correct to hold that Rule 75 does not apply where the plaintiff’s claim against the insured does not include a claim for which the insured is indemnified, but the plaintiff has notified the Court of its intention to add such a claim – whether the principle in Couch v Attorney General [2008] NZSC 45, that if a saving amendment can be made to a claim it should not be struck out, should apply by analogy where a saving amendment is to be made to a plaintiff’ s claim, that will give the defendant a right to indemnity from its insurers.[2008] NZCA 419 CA 132/08 23 October 2008
Result
Notice of Abandonment of Appeal lodged. Appeal deemed to be dismissed.
9 July 2009
9 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave granted
Additional document
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 April 2009
Case name
Tony Douglas Robertson v The Queen
Case number
SC 90/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal - appellant convicted on counts of robbery, attempted kidnapping, abduction of a child and performing indecent acts - Court of Appeal dismissed appeal on basis that there was no miscarriage of justice due to Keane J’s failure to give a lies direction and that the verdicts were not unreasonable - appeal to the Supreme Court on the same grounds of miscarriage of justice.[2008] NZCA 282 CA 155/07 6 August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ROBERTSON v R SC 90/2008 [3 April 2009] (PDF, 14 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 April 2009
Case name
Astrazeneca Limited v Commerce Commission and Pharmaceutical Management Agency
Case number
SC 91/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Respondent gave notice under s 98 of the Commerce Act 1986 of an investigation into allegations that the applicant acted contrary to section 36 of the Act in negotiations with PHARMAC – whether exemption to Part 2 of the Commerce Act in s 53 of the Public Health and Disability Act 2000 applied so that the respondent should not have issued a notice – whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding it did not have sufficient factual information to determine whether s 53 applied – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that there might be some other purpose of s 53 which would become evident when it was considered in light of the full facts.[2008] NZCA 479 CA 241/2008 11 November 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted
25 February 2009
________________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the notice under s 98 of the Commerce Act 1986 given by the Commerce Commission on 31 October 2007 was ultra vires and invalid. It is ordered that the notice is quashed. The Commerce Commission is ordered to pay the appellant costs in this Court of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements as fixed by the Registrar. Costs in the Court of Appeal and the High Court should now be fixed respectively by those Courts in light of this Court’s judgment.
26 August 2009
25 February 2009
________________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the notice under s 98 of the Commerce Act 1986 given by the Commerce Commission on 31 October 2007 was ultra vires and invalid. It is ordered that the notice is quashed. The Commerce Commission is ordered to pay the appellant costs in this Court of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements as fixed by the Registrar. Costs in the Court of Appeal and the High Court should now be fixed respectively by those Courts in light of this Court’s judgment.
26 August 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Deryck Joseph Morgan v The Queen
Case number
SC 92/2008
Summary
Criminal Appeal – aggravated robbery – appeal against conviction – miscarriage of justice – previous inconsistent statement of hostile witness – actual statement not produced until re-examination because of oversight – whether Court of Appeal was correct to hold that this statement was admissible as evidence of the truth of its contents.[2008] NZCA 537 CA 481 /2008 5 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
25 March 2009
_________________________
Appeal dismissed.
16 March 2010
25 March 2009
_________________________
Appeal dismissed.
16 March 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 16 July 2009 (PDF, 294 KB)
Media Releases
- press release morgan v the queen (PDF, 31 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
MORGAN v R SC 92/2008 [25 March 2009] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
MORGAN v R SC 92/2008 [16 March 2010] (PDF, 87 KB)
Case name
James Michael Leuluaiali’i v The Queen
Case number
SC 1/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – appellant convicted as party to attempted murder and murder – appeal by a co-accused had been allowed on grounds of error in summing up in relation to parties; like errors in present case – appeal allowed in relation to attempted murder – in relation to murder the proviso to s 385(1) applied and appeal dismissed – whether application of the proviso led to a substantial miscarriage of justice. CA 122/06 22 November 2006
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 30 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LEULUAIALI'L v R SC 1/2007 [30 March 2007] (PDF, 16 KB)
Case name
Gail Denise Maney v The Queen
Case number
SC 2/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – application in Court of Appeal to admit fresh evidence – key witness implicating applicant at trial recanting evidence before Court of Appeal on the basis that it had been coerced by Police conduct – witness not considered credible by Court of Appeal – whether retrial ought to be granted in order for credibility of witness to be considered with totality of remaining evidence – application for leave to appeal out of time. CA 244/03 11 August 2005
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 1 May 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter William Russel v The Queen
Case number
SC 3/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act. CA 475/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
29 May 2007
_____________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenes.
29 May 2007
_____________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenes.
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Peter Michael Connolly v The Queen
Case number
SC 4/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act. CA 472/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. Application for leave to cross appeal dismissed.
29 May 2007
___________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenses.
29 May 2007
___________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Page 213 of 244