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.
8 November 2024
Case information summary 2024 (as at 8 November 2024) – Cases where leave granted (126 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 8 November 2024) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 116 KB)
All years
Case name
Kathryn Frances Boswell v Owen Ross Millar
Case number
SC 79/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in taking into account improper evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the trial Judge’s finding that there was no evidence of a failure to cooperate.[2014] NZCA 314 CA 293/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements.
7 October 2014
The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements.
7 October 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
The Queen v TWW
Case number
SC 80/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, ss 28, 30 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that admissions by the accused obtained through a police undercover operation employing the “scenario technique” were unfairly and thus improperly obtained – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in adopting a Bill of Rights analysis where the accused’s rights were not breached – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that exclusion of the admissions was proportionate to the impropriety – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the admissions were unreliable.[2014] NZCA 339 CA 852/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted ([2014] NZCA 339).
The questions on which leave is given are whether the Court of Appeal was right to find that:
(a) the appellant’s confession to “Scott” was unfairly obtained; and
(b) evidence of it should be excluded.
10 October 2014
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the evidence in question is ruled to be admissible.
18 December 2015
The questions on which leave is given are whether the Court of Appeal was right to find that:
(a) the appellant’s confession to “Scott” was unfairly obtained; and
(b) evidence of it should be excluded.
10 October 2014
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the evidence in question is ruled to be admissible.
18 December 2015
Transcripts
- Hearing date 12 February 2015 (PDF, 506 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Supreme court decision
Case name
Gary Owen Burgess v TSB Bank Limited
Case number
SC 81/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Security for costs – Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005, r 35 – Whether the Court of Appeal, on an application to review a Court of Appeal Registrar’s decision on security for costs, must provide a notice of hearing and the opportunity to provide evidence and submissions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not granting an extension of time for the Registrar to consider the appropriate quantum of costs on consolidation.[2014] NZCA 334 CA 47/2014; CA 126/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant must pay to the respondent costs on the application of $1,000 together with disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
10 October 2014
The applicant must pay to the respondent costs on the application of $1,000 together with disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
10 October 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Jonathan Dixon v The Queen
Case number
SC 82/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Crimes Act 1961 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 386(2) of the Crimes Act 1961 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in amending the charge and entering a conviction on the amended charge – Whether amending the charge breached the applicant’ s rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal failed to consider and take into account relevant submissions and evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal’s failure to consider and take into account relevant submissions denied the applicant a proper opportunity of appeal under s 383 of the Crimes Act and resulted in a breach of the applicant’ s rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not finding a miscarriage of justice.[2014] NZCA 329 CA 518/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred when it dismissed the appeal.
23 October 2014
___________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The decision of the Court of Appeal quashing the appellant’s conviction for obtaining property contrary to s 249(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961 and substituting a conviction for obtaining a benefit contrary to s 249(1)(a) is quashed. The appellant’s original conviction is reinstated.
C The appellant is to contact the Probation Service in South Dunedin by 10.30 am on Wednesday 28 October 2015 to make arrangements to complete his sentence.
20 October 2015
The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred when it dismissed the appeal.
23 October 2014
___________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The decision of the Court of Appeal quashing the appellant’s conviction for obtaining property contrary to s 249(1)(a) of the Crimes Act 1961 and substituting a conviction for obtaining a benefit contrary to s 249(1)(a) is quashed. The appellant’s original conviction is reinstated.
C The appellant is to contact the Probation Service in South Dunedin by 10.30 am on Wednesday 28 October 2015 to make arrangements to complete his sentence.
20 October 2015
Transcripts
- Hearing date 24 March 2015 (PDF, 447 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2015] NZSC 147 (PDF, 253 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
JONATHAN DIXON v R [2014] NZSC 151 [23 October 2014] (PDF, 42 KB)
Substantive judgment
JONATHAN DIXON v R [2015] NZSC 147 [20 October 2015] (PDF, 343 KB)
Case name
Tatsuhiko Koyama v New Zealand Law Society
Case number
SC 83/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether there was a procedural defect or lack of jurisdiction in relation to the High Court judgment.[2014] NZHC 1146
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant must pay the first respondent costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements determined if necessary by the Registrar.
10 October 2014
The applicant must pay the first respondent costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements determined if necessary by the Registrar.
10 October 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
The Wanaka Gym Limited v Queenstown Lakes District Council
Case number
SC 84/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Building Act 2004 – Whether the High Court erred in classifying the residential building as other than a single household unit – Whether High Court erred in holding that the C/AS1 purpose group SA was the appropriate proxy to meet the Building Code fire safety requirements for a residential building – Whether the High Court failed to take proper account of the different criminal and civil standards of proof – Whether the convictions were based on improperly obtained evidence – Whether leave to adduce fresh evidence should be granted. [2012] NZHC 284
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
23 December 2014
23 December 2014
Supreme court decision
Supreme court decision
Supreme court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Fiona Caroline Graham v Queenstown Lakes District Council
Case number
SC 85/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Building Act 2004 – Whether the High Court erred in classifying the residential building as other than a single household unit – Whether High Court erred in holding that the C/AS1 purpose group SA was the appropriate proxy to meet the Building Code fire safety requirements for a residential building – Whether the High Court failed to take proper account of the different criminal and civil standards of proof – Whether the convictions were based on improperly obtained evidence – Whether leave to adduce fresh evidence should be granted.[2012] NZHC 284
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
23 December 2014
23 December 2014
Supreme court decision
Supreme court decision
Supreme court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Judicial Conduct Commissioner and others
Case number
SC 86/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Judicature Act 1908, s 61A(1) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to address the main ground of the appellant’ s application for an order under s 61A(1) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the relevant application was subject to the review of the Registrar – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Registrar was correct to conclude that the appellant did not meet the financial test – Whether the Chambers judgment will be an unsafe contradiction of prior directions given by the Supreme Court.[2014] NZCA 358 CA 173/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
9 October 2014
9 October 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Clive Richard Bradbury and Gregory Alan Peebles v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 87/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to set aside a decision which has been the subject of an appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to indemnity costs – Whether the proceeding involves substantial relitigation of issues already determined by the courts.[2014] NZCA 350 CA 623/103
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. Costs are reserved. If the respondents wish to obtain orders for costs they should apply within 14 days setting out in detail the orders sought. If such applications are made, the applicants may respond within a further 14 days.
2 December 2014
_________
Leave is granted under s 76(2) of the Insolvency Act 2006 to permit continuation of the applications for costs in respect of SC 87/2014 and SC 103/2014. We fix costs and disbursements in favour of the Commissioner of Inland Revenue in the sum of $10,653.99.
8 June 2015
2 December 2014
_________
Leave is granted under s 76(2) of the Insolvency Act 2006 to permit continuation of the applications for costs in respect of SC 87/2014 and SC 103/2014. We fix costs and disbursements in favour of the Commissioner of Inland Revenue in the sum of $10,653.99.
8 June 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Supreme court decision
Case name
Helen Elizabeth Milner v The Queen
Case number
SC 88/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the verdicts were unreasonable [2014] NZCA 366 CA 120/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
16 April 2015
16 April 2015
Transcripts
- Hearing date 16 February 2015 (PDF, 189 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MILNER v R [2015] NZSC 38 [16 April 2015] (PDF, 94 KB)
Page 143 of 250