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
James Hemi Biddle v The Queen
Case number
SC 82/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Robbery – Criminal Procedure – Judge’s summing up – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up to jury on issues of credibility and reliability was appropriate – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up did not give rise to miscarriage of justice.[2008] NZCA 398 CA 243/2008 30 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BIDDLE v R SC 82/2008 [5 December 2008] (PDF, 13 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal refused.
5 December 2008.
Hearing
7 July 2009
Result
Appeal dismissed.
16 July 2009
Case name
Bernard Terence Whimp v The Queen
Case number
SC 83/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – Companies Act 1993 – applicant convicted of burglary, removing records of a company in liquidation, and failing to supply records of a company in liquidation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding there was sufficient evidence to establish a tenancy of the premises which could be enforced by the liquidator – whether the Court of Appeal relied on inadmissible secondary and hearsay evidence in doing so – whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that there was sufficient evidence of a licence over the property, the circumstances of which determined the applicant’s rights in relation to the premises and rendered him a trespasser – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining the scope of a liquidator’s powers under s 261(1) of the Act.[2008] NZCA 405 CA 523/2008 8 October 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WHIMP v R SC 83/2008 [4 February 2009] (PDF, 17 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
4 February 2009
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Attorney--General
Case number
SC 84/2008
Summary
Civil – Administrative law – Whether the Court of Appeal failed to observe principles of natural justice by deciding an application for indemnity costs and making findings on the motive of the Appellant ‘on the papers’ – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in taking into account the Appellant’ s standing on the judicial review proceedings when that was already under appeal separately to the Court.[2008] NZCA 426 CA 150/2008 20 October 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
4 February 2009
4 February 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 7 July 2009 (PDF, 122 KB)
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Property Ventures Investments Limited v Regalwood Holdings Limited
Case number
SC 85/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – property – validity of settlement notice and notice of cancellation of an agreement for sale and purchase – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondent had validly cancelled the agreement for sale and purchase when the Court had held that essentiality of time under the respondent’s earlier settlement notice had been waived – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that cl 5.4 of the standard ADLS/REINZ form (7th ed, July 1999) applies only to misdescription about the property at the time of the agreement and not to a breach of warranty under cl 6.2 – accordingly, whether the respondent’s settlement notice under cl 6.5 requiring the purchaser to settle for the full price was valid.[2008] NZCA 422 CA 43/2008 16 October 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
4 February 2009
_______________________
Appeal allowed. Orders made in the High Court set aside. Summary Judgment application dismissed. Proceeding remitted to the High Court. Costs of $15,000 to the appellant.
28 April 2010
4 February 2009
_______________________
Appeal allowed. Orders made in the High Court set aside. Summary Judgment application dismissed. Proceeding remitted to the High Court. Costs of $15,000 to the appellant.
28 April 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 25 June 2009 SC 85/2008 (PDF, 345 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2010] NZSC 47 (PDF, 37 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Frank Onyebu Aroh v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – importing cocaine and heroin and exporting cocaine – appeal against conviction and sentence – miscarriage of justice – whether undue pressure placed on jury who deliberated until approx 1am – whether judge gave correct directions regarding similar fact evidence – whether judge’s directions regarding the defendant’s earlier trial were prejudicial[2008] NZCA 457 CA 106/07 5 November 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FRANK AROH V R SC 86/2008 [30 March 2009] (PDF, 15 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
30 March 2009
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
Page 218 of 250