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
KHW v The Queen
Case number
SC 30/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining the application for an extension of time to appeal against the applicant’ s sentence on the basis that any causal contribution of early dementia to the applicant’s offending was not substantial. [2016] NZCA 33 CA13/2015
Result
Notice of abandonment lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.
10 June 2016
10 June 2016
Judgment appealed from
W (CA315/2015) v R [2016] NZCA 33 29 February 2016
Case name
BM v The Queen
Case number
SC 31/2016
Summary
Criminal appeal – Crimes Act 1961, s 195 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding the sentence was not manifestly excessive.[2016] NZCA 53 CA 599/2015
Result
The Application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 20 June 2016 __
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
M(SC 31/2016) v R [2016] NZSC 72 20 June 2016 (PDF, 81 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 32/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal incorrectly assessed the applicant’s entitlement under the insurance policy issued by the respondent – Whether the applicant is entitled to relief from the parties’ settlement agreement under s 6 of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.[2016] NZCA 67 CA 400/2015
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited [2016] NZCA 67).
B The approved grounds are:
(a) the nature and extent of the respondent’s liability under the insurance policy; and
(b) the effect of the release.
20 June 2016
____________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Prattley is to pay Vero costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
6 December 2016
B The approved grounds are:
(a) the nature and extent of the respondent’s liability under the insurance policy; and
(b) the effect of the release.
20 June 2016
____________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Prattley is to pay Vero costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
6 December 2016
Transcripts
- Hearing date 10 - 11 October 2016 (PDF, 838 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2016] NZSC 158 (PDF, 246 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Amanda Adele White and Anne Leoline Emily Freeman v Christopher Maurice Lynch and Stuart Gordon Spence
Case number
SC 33/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal Civil Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the Deputy Registrar’s decision to decline to dispense with security for costs. [2016] NZCA 78 CA 740/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
17 May 2016
17 May 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
HC judgment
HC judgment
Case name
Yong Xin Chen v The Cornwall Park Trust Board
Case number
SC 34/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of a lease[2016] NZCA 65 CA 645/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Cornwall Park Trust Board Inc v Chen [2016] NZCA 65).
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:
(i) to hold that the applicant is liable under the lease to pay the upset rental from the date of expiry of the lease until she vacated the property; and
(ii) in interpreting and applying the applicant’s repair obligations under the lease.
4 July 2016 ____________ Notice of abandonment lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 26 September 2016
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:
(i) to hold that the applicant is liable under the lease to pay the upset rental from the date of expiry of the lease until she vacated the property; and
(ii) in interpreting and applying the applicant’s repair obligations under the lease.
4 July 2016 ____________ Notice of abandonment lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 26 September 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Hearing
15 November 2016
William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and Blanchard JJ.
Case name
Michael Marino v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 35/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Application for habeus corpus – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of ss 91(1) and 90(2) of the Parole Act 2002.[2016] NZCA 117 CA 129/2016
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Marino v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2016] NZCA 133).
B The approved question is: Did the Court of Appeal err in its interpretation of ss 90 and 91 of the Parole Act 2002 or in the application of those sections to the position of the applicant?
6 May 2016
______________
A Mr Marino’s appeal is allowed. Costs are reserved.
B Mr Booth’ s appeal is dismissed.
22 September 2016
B The approved question is: Did the Court of Appeal err in its interpretation of ss 90 and 91 of the Parole Act 2002 or in the application of those sections to the position of the applicant?
6 May 2016
______________
A Mr Marino’s appeal is allowed. Costs are reserved.
B Mr Booth’ s appeal is dismissed.
22 September 2016
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 July 2016 (PDF, 372 KB)
- Hearing date 26 July 2016 (PDF, 416 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2016] NZSC 127 (PDF, 255 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
Martin James Mailley v District Court at North Shore and New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 36/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 48(4) of the Extradition Act 1999. [2016] NZCA 83 CA716/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 20 June 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Francisc Catalin Deliu v Boon Gunn Hong
Case number
SC 37/2016
Summary
Civil appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal’s decision was inconsistent with its statement of the issue – Whether principles governing appeals against the exercise of discretion were applied incorrectly.[2016] NZCA 75 CA 425/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500. 28 July 2016
B The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500. 28 July 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Cecilia Victoria Uhrle v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 66(2) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against conviction – Whether the trial Judge’s direction to the jury incorrectly conflated foresight and intention in terms of common purpose liability under s 66(2). [2015] NZCA 412 CA265/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
13 June 2016.
13 June 2016.
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Wayne James Bracken v The Queen
Case number
SC 40/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the trial Judge’s directions were adequate – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the trial was not unfair. [2016] NZCA 79 CA785/2012
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
13 September 2016
13 September 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 103 of 244