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.
27 September 2024
Case information summary 2024 (as at 27 September 2024) – Cases where leave granted (127 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 27 September 2024) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 120 KB)
All years
Case name
Woolworths Limited v The Commerce Commission and others
Case number
SC 51/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – section 66 Commerce Act 1986 – acquisitions that will have or are likely to have the effect of substantially lessening competition – whether Court of Appeal erred in its approach to giving clearance under s 66 – whether clearance can be declined on the grounds that it is uncertain whether the acquisition will cause a substantial lessening of competition – whether the approach to be adopted by the Court in s 66 cases is different to the balance of probabilities approach used in ordinary civil cases – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to take an approach to the term ‘likely’ which extended to scenarios that were merely possible or speculative – whether ‘substantial’ effects on competition include effects that are merely nominal or ephemeral – if Court of Appeal test was correct, whether Court of Appeal should have referred case back to High Court to apply correct test – whether Court of Appeal had proper regard to all the evidence when applying s 66.[2008] NZCA 276 CA 55/2008 1 August 2008
Dates
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
17 October 2008.
17 October 2008.
Case name
Wiilie Ye, Candy Ye and Tim Ye v Minister of Immigration and Yueing Ding
Case number
SC 53/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – immigration – removal order made under s 54 of the Immigration Act 1987 in respect of an overstayer mother whose children are New Zealand citizens – humanitarian interview conducted by Immigration Officer who determined not to exercise the power of cancellation of the removal order under s 58 of the Immigration Act – whether the Court of Appeal erred in not holding that the children’s welfare and best interests as New Zealand citizen children of an overstayer parent ought to have been directly addressed and taken into account by the Immigration Officer as the paramount or alternatively as a primary consideration in his decision making – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to hold that the applicants were entitled to be heard either prior to the decision to make the removal order or prior to the decision to proceed with the removal and thus to be accorded natural justice in their own right – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to uphold the applicants’ claim that the first respondent failed to properly take into account the applicants’ rights and New Zealand’ s obligations under international law - whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the appropriate relief was to remit the matter of the Immigration Service to be reconsidered “if it sees fit”.[2008] NZCA 291 CA 184/2006
Media Releases
Transcript
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted
4 November 2008
Case name
Roderick William Nielsen v Dysart Timbers Limited
Case number
SC 54/2008
Summary
Civil – Costs – whether the Court of Appeal correctly applied an objective test to the issue of whether the appellant intended a settlement offer to remain open for acceptance after the Supreme Court had granted leave to appeal.[2008] NZCA 280 CA 630/07 6 August 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
28 October 2008
___________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 and reasonable disbursements.
15 May 2009
28 October 2008
___________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 and reasonable disbursements.
15 May 2009
Media Releases
- media release nielsen v dysart (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Tiny Intelligence Limited v Resport Limited
Case number
SC 55/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – Copyright Act 1994 – damages – the High Court found that Resport Ltd fragrantly breached the copyright of Tiny Intelligence Ltd in several toys and awarded Tiny Intelligence Ltd $50,000 by way of account of profits – whether additional damages are available under s 121(2) of the Copyright Act where the Court has awarded an account of profits – whether the House of Lords decision of Redrow Homes Ltd v Bett Brothers Plc [1999] 1 AC 197 should be applied to the New Zealand Copyright Act.[2008] NZCA 281 CA 270/2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
21 October 2008
_________________________
Appeal dismissed. Cost to the respondent $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements.
8 April 2009
21 October 2008
_________________________
Appeal dismissed. Cost to the respondent $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements.
8 April 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Alan Qiuand Stanley Qiu v Minister of Immigration, He Qin Qiu and Ziao Yun Qiu
Case number
SC 56/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – immigration – removal order made under s 54 of the Immigration Act 1987 in respect of overstayer mother whose children are New Zealand citizens – humanitarian interview conducted by Immigration Officer who determined not to exercise the power of cancellation of the removal order under s 58 of the Immigration Act – whether the Court of Appeal erred in not holding that the children’s welfare and best interests as New Zealand citizen children of an overstayer parent ought to have been directly addressed and taken into account by the Immigration Officer as the paramount or alternatively as a primary consideration in his decision making – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to hold that the applicants were entitled to be heard either prior to the decision to make the removal order or prior to the decision to proceed with the removal and thus to be accorded natural justice in their own right – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to uphold the applicants’ claim that the first respondent failed to properly take into account the applicants’ rights and New Zealand’ s obligations under international law.[2008] NZCA 291 CA 192/2006
Media Releases
Transcription
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted
4 November 2008
Case name
Stephen William Garret v The Queen
Case number
SC 57/2008
Summary
Criminal - Appeal against sentence – Grievous bodily harm with intent to injure – Whether 3½ years imprisonment manifestly excessive for vigilante attack given early offer of guilty plea to lesser charge of which ultimately convicted and $20,000 reparation payment as requested by victim – Whether sentencing Judge erred in law in finding appellant had leadership role in operation.[2008] NZCA 294 CA 176/2008 12 August 2008
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
20 October 2008.
20 October 2008.
Case name
Christopher James Fullbeck Mosley v The Queen
Case number
SC 58/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – trial took place with ten jurors – whether the Court of Appeal erred in confirming that there were “exceptional circumstances relating to the trial” which justified continuing with ten jurors under s 374 Crimes Act 1961 – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to conclude that s 374(8) excluded a right to review the trial Judge’ s decision to discharge the 12th and 11th jurors.[2008] NZCA 319 CA 612/2007 25 August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MOSLEY v R SC 58/2008 [17 November 2008] (PDF, 17 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
17 November 2008.
Case name
Kelly Te Peeti Ringi v The Queen
Case number
SC 59/2008
Summary
Criminal – Sexual violation - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the evidence supported the conviction – whether the Appellant had inadequate representation at trial and in the Court of Appeal. [2008] NZCA 293 CA33/2008 12 August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
RINGI v R SC 59/2008 [11 February 2009] (PDF, 16 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
11 February 2009
Case name
Alfred Taenga Mata v The Queen
Case number
SC 60/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – Supreme Court Act s 14 – leap-frog appeal against District Court judgment – whether exceptional circumstances exist so as to justify taking the appeal directly to the Supreme Court.Evidence Act 2006 s 43 – District Court judgment ruled that certain “propensity” evidence is admissible at the applicant’s up-coming trial for robbery – the incident of propensity that the Crown sought to adduce occurred one year later than the incident that is the subject of the current proceedings, and resulted in charges being brought against the applicant – whether a non-proven criminal allegation is capable of being used as propensity evidence – whether, in deciding whether propensity evidence should be admitted under s 43, courts are required to follow common law principles – whether the specific robbery allegation sought to be adduced as propensity evidence meets the threshold of similar fact evidence that can be considered as an “other matter” when assessing the prejudicial effect of the evidence under s 43(4).CRI 2007-092-006967 14th August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MATA v R SC 60/2008 [15 September 2008] (PDF, 15 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
15 September 2008
Case name
Shane Edward Williams v The Queen
Case number
SC 61/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against conviction – conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine – section 25(b) New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether High Court Judge should have stayed the criminal proceedings after making finding of undue delay in bringing the applicant to trial – stay granted in relation to eight co-accused – whether applicant should have received same remedy.[2008] NZCA 296 CA 664/2007 12 August 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
3 November 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
15 May 2009
3 November 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
15 May 2009
Media Releases
- williams press release (PDF, 78 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
WILLIAMS v R SC 61/2008 [3 November 2008] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
SHANE EDWARD WILLIAMS v R SC 61/2008 [15 May 2009] (PDF, 48 KB)
Transcript
Page 214 of 249