Subscribe to the RSS feed Print this page

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
OH v The Queen
Case number
SC 125/2010
Summary
Criminal – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – validity and scope of search warrants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the validity of search warrants issued under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act can be used to authorise surveillance on private land – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – unreasonable search and seizure – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the police in this case did not breach s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Evidence Act 2006 – admissibility of evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its undertaking of the s 30 balancing exercise and in concluding that the evidence in dispute was admissible at trial[2010] NZCA 528  CA 825/2009  19 November 2010
Result
The appeal allowed in part.  The video surveillance evidence (other than footage of vehicles on Reid Road) is inadmissible against those appellants.  All the other disputed evidence is admissible against them. 2 September 2011.
Leave judgment - leave granted
HAMED and OTHERS v R SC 125/2010 and Others [24 March 2011] (PDF, 84 KB)
Substantive judgment
HAMED v R SC 125/2010 [2 September 2011] (PDF, 551 KB)
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

The approved grounds are whether the challenged evidence was lawfully obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 or was, alternatively, properly admissible pursuant to s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.

25 March 2011
Hearing

3 and 4 May 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
Christopher Ian Freakley v The Queen
Case number
SC 126/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against sentence – whether the sentencing judge should have taken into account the fact the applicant was found not guilty on a count of aggravated robbery.[2010] NZCA 497  CA 26/2010  29 October  2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FREAKLEY v R SC 126/2010 [7 March 2011] (PDF, 45 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

7 March 2011.
Case name
Karen McGrath v Accident Compensation Corporation
Case number
SC 127/2010
Summary
Civil – Accident Compensation Act 2001 – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that the ACC had a reasonable basis under s 110(3) Accident Compensation Act to require the Applicant to undergo a vocational independence assessment.[2010] NZCA 535  CA 302/2009  19 November  2010
Result
A  The application for leave to appeal is granted.
B  The approved ground is whether the Court of Appeal in [2010] NZCA 535 has correctly interpreted and applied s 110(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001.
 8 March 2011
___________________
A The appeal is allowed and the notice given on 9 September 2008 by the Accident Compensation Corporation is quashed.
B Costs are reserved.  Counsel may file memoranda if necessary.
7 July 2011
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
MCGRATH v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION SC 127/2010 [8 March 2011] (PDF, 7 KB)
Substantive judgment
McGRATH v ACCIDENT COMPENSATION CORPORATION SC 127/2010 [7 July 2011] (PDF, 145 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : 2 June 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young J.
Case name
TWI and others  v The Queen
Case number
SC 128/2010 ; 129/2010; 130/2010; 131/2010; 132/2010; 133/2010/ 135/2010; 138/2010; 139/2010
Summary
Criminal – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – validity and scope of search warrants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the validity of search warrants issued under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act can be used to authorise surveillance on private land – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – unreasonable search and seizure – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the police in this case did not breach s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Evidence Act 2006 – admissibility of evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its undertaking of the s 30 balancing exercise and in concluding that the evidence in dispute was admissible at trial[2010] NZCA 497  CA 809/2009  19 November  2010
Result
A The appeals of Mr Tame Iti, Mr Te Rangiwhiria Kemara, Mr Urs Signer and Ms Emily Bailey are dismissed. B The appeals of the other appellants are allowed in part.  The video surveillance evidence (other than footage of vehicles on Reid Road) is inadmissible against those appellants.  All the other disputed evidence is admissible against them.
2 September 2011.
Leave judgment - leave granted
HAMED and OTHERS v R SC 125/2010 and Others [24 March 2011] (PDF, 84 KB)
Supreme court decision
HAMED v R SC 125/2010 [2 September 2011] (PDF, 551 KB)
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is granted.

The approved grounds are whether the challenged evidence was lawfully obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 or was, alternatively, properly admissible pursuant to s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.

25 March 2011
Hearing

3 and 4 May 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
Evgeny Orlov v Anza Distributing NZ Limited and USG Interiors Pacific Limited
Case number
SC 136/2010
Summary
Civil – costs – whether Court of Appeal with jurisdiction to strike out appeal against costs judgment in circumstances where no dispute between parties and main purpose of appeal to challenge legal basis of decision and factual findings that counsel had failed to reach minimum standard of competence that should be attained by officers of the Court – whether appropriate for appellant to pay for an amicus to act as contradictor – whether Court of Appeal decision contravened appellant’s rights under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights; and United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.   [2010] NZCA 536  CA 683/2009   22 November  2010
Additional document
sc 136 2010 orlov v anza fees review (PDF, 21 KB)
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ORLOV v ANZA DISTRIBUTING (NZ) LIMI TED & ORS SC 136/2010 [29 March 2011] (PDF, 69 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed. No order for costs.

29 March 2011.
Case name
NJW v The Queen
Case number
SC 137/2010
Summary
Criminal – Sexual Offences – Whether evidence of complainant’ s sexual history directly relevant and excluded contrary to the interests of justice at trial – Whether sentence imposed by Court of Appeal excessive in the circumstances.[2010] NZCA 561  CA 247/2010  29 November  2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
W v R SC 137/2010 [8 March 2011 (PDF, 10 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

8 March 2011.
Case name
Gordana Vukomanovic v The Residence Review Board
Case number
SC 140/2010
Summary
Civil – s 115(1) and 146A of the Immigration Act 1987 – Appeal against the decision of the High Court declaring that the Court had no jurisdiction to consider an appeal brought out of time against a decision of the Residence Review Board. Civ 2010 485 497  Miller J 20 May 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
VUKOMANOVIC v RESIDENCE REVIEW BOARD SC 140/2010 [9 March 2011 (PDF, 42 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal is dismissed with no order for costs.

9 March  2010.
Case name
JMW v The Queen
Case number
SC 141/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal  – Proposed “leap frog” appeal – Whether jurisdiction exists to hear proposed appeal – Whether challenges based on jurisdiction of the High Court, due process, alleged abuses of rights, accuracy of documents and sufficiency of evidence ought to be upheld.   Cri 2010 092 2879  Brewer J  11 October 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Not publicly available
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

7  March 2011.
Case name
WAH v WTW and others
Case number
SC 142/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Care of Children Act 2004 – High Court made order that children should remain under guardianship of High Court and that permanent homes outside the family be found – Whether High Court adopted the wrong test under s 5(e) Care of Children Act for assessing psychological violence to children – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding High Court Judge not required to recuse herself – Whether High Court gave insufficient weight to Māori cultural issues – Whether High Court wrong to call appellant’s former counsel as witness – Whether Court of Appeal failed to address constitutional separation of powers issue.[2010] NZCA 577  CA 40/2010  2 December 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
sc 142 2010 wah v wtw and ors (PDF, 35 KB)
Dates

The application by the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development for leave to intervene is granted.

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

14 March 2011.
Case name
CJ B v MVB
Case number
SC 1/2009
Summary
Civil – family law – Property (Relationships) Act 1908 – parties ended a de facto relationship but subsequently married and later separated again – Court of Appeal held that, for the purposes of s 4C of the Act, the parties’ marriage was not a continuation of their de facto relationship – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to apply a different yardstick in deciding whether a relationship had come to an end for married and de facto couples during a period of temporary separation.[2008] NZCA 520  CA 412/2008 2 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused. 17 March 2009
Page 197 of 250