Skip to content. | Skip to navigation

Personal tools

Sections
Subsections
You are here: Home > About Courts > Supreme Court > Case Summaries

Case Summaries 2016

 

 

Updated 26 August 2016


Supreme Court case summaries are published on this page as they become available:


Case Number

SC 1/2016  

Case Name

Kerryn Mitchell v The Queen

Summary

Criminal appeal – Bail – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the application for bail before the applicant had submitted further written submissions to that Court.

[2015] NZCA 634   CA 675/2015

Dates Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
24 February 2016
Hearing



Case Number

SC 2/2016  

Case Name

Peter Gerard Stockman v NZ Asscoiation of Counsellors Incorporated

Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal should have recalled its judgment ordering standard rather than indemnity costs – Whether judgments must directly refer to all submissions made by parties.

 

[2015] NZCA 542   CA 669/2013

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

There is no order for costs.

 

29 February 2016

A The application for recall of the Court’s judgment in Stockman v New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc [2016] NZSC 18 is dismissed.

B There is no order for costs.

7 April 2016

Hearing



Case Number

SC 3/2016  

Case Name

William Yan and Wei You v Commissioner of Police

Summary

Civil Appeal – Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009, s 29 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 29 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009.

[2015] NZCA 576  CA 683/2014

Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

26  April 2016
Hearing



Case Number

SC 4/2016  

Case Name

Zhihong Xu v Lijing Zeng v Commissioner of Police

Summary

Civil Appeal – Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009, s 29 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 29 Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009.

[2015] NZCA 576  CA 684/2014

Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

26  April 2016
Hearing



Case Number

SC 5/2016  

Case Name

Kulbir Singh and Navjot Kaur v Chief Executive, Ministry of Busines, Innovation and Employment

Summary

Civil Appeal – Immigration Act, s 177 – Whether Court of Appeal interpreted s 177 Immigration Act correctly ­– Whether Court of Appeal applied the correct standard for unreasonableness to a deportation decision.

[2015] NZCA 592  CA 484/2014

Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

19  April 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 6/2016

Case Name

Garry Albert Muir and Peter Arnold Maude v Commissioner of Inland Revenue 

Summary Civil Appeal – Whether the applicants’ claims for tax deductions under sub-pt EH of the Income Tax Act 1994 are arguable ­– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in awarding indemnity costs.                                                                          

[2015] NZCA 591   CA276/2016
Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Muir v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2015] NZCA 591).


B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was right:
(i) to find that the appellant could not arguably pursue claims for the 1999 and following tax years in reliance on sub-pt EH of the Income Tax Act 1994; and
(ii) to award costs on an indemnity basis against the appellant.
20 July 2016

 

Hearing

22 August 2016

Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ.

Decision reserved.



Case Number

SC 7/2016

Case Name

Douglas John  Williamson v The Queen

Summary

Criminal appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that no miscarriage of justice occurred despite trial counsel acting inconsistently with his client’s instructions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the Animal Welfare Act 1999, s 28 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining an application to adduce further evidence.

 [2015] NZCA 621  CA 398/2014 

Dates Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

26  April 2016
Hearing



Case Number

SC 8/2016

Case Name

John Blackwood Williamson v The Queen 

Summary

Criminal appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that no miscarriage of justice occurred despite trial counsel acting inconsistently with his client’s instructions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the Animal Welfare Act 1999, s 28 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining an application to adduce further evidence.

[2015] NZCA 621  CA 399/2014

Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

26  April 2016
Hearing



Case Number

SC 9/2016

Case Name

W v The Queen 

Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence.

[2011] NZCA 135  CA 591/2010

Dates

A   An extension of time is granted.                                         
B  The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.  

2 May 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 10/2016

Case Name

Edward Thomas Booth v The Queen 

Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence.

 

[2015] NZCA 603  CA 101/2015

Dates

A  The application for leave to appeal is granted (Booth v R [2015]    NZCA 603).


B  The approved question is whether the sentencing Judge was correct to structure the appellant’s sentence in the way that he did, particularly as that sentence structure means that the time that the appellant spent on remand does not count towards his total period of imprisonment served or for parole eligibility purposes.

27 April 2016

Hearing

5 July 2016


Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ

Decision reserved

 

 

Case Number

SC 11/2016

Case Name

Karl Leslie Raymond Marwood v The Commissioner of Police and others 

Summary

Civil Appeal – Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the High Court has no power to exclude improperly obtained evidence in a proceeding under the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the High Court Judge was wrong to exclude evidence.

 [2015] NZCA 608   CA 487/2014

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (Commissioner of Police v Marwood [2015] NZCA 608).


B The approved question is:
Did the Court of Appeal err in holding that the High Court had no jurisdiction (or power) to exclude the challenged evidence obtained by search of the applicant’s premises and, if so, should the challenged evidence be excluded in this proceeding?

11 April 2016

Hearing

17 June 2016

Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O’Regan JJ.

Decision reserved

 

 

Case Number

SC 12/2016

Case Name

The Queen v GJA

Summary

Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 30 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in excluding evidence on the basis that it was improperly obtained.

[2015] NZCA 628  CA 116/2015 

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (R v A [2015] NZCA 628).

B    The issues are:
(i)    whether the electricity consumption records were improperly obtained from the service provider;
(ii)    whether the Court of Appeal was correct to hold that evidence that had earlier been excluded as improperly obtained could not be relied on; and
(iii)    whether, even if improperly obtained, the evidence should be admitted under s 30(2)(b) of the Evidence Act 2006.

 

15 March 2016

Hearing

16 June 2016.

Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O’Regan JJ

Decision reserved

 

 

Case Number

SC 13/2016

Case Name

Robert Erwood v The Official Assignee

Summary

Civil appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal overlooked material points and therefore erred in dismissing the application for extension of time and awarding costs against the applicant.

[2015] NZCA 620  CA 168/2015

Dates The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                   

16 May 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 14/2016

Case Name

Auckland Council v Wendco (NZ) Limited and Wiri Licensing Trust

Summary

Civil Appeal – Resource Management Act 1991, s 95E – Whether the Court of Appeal interpreted the phrase “related to” in s 95E too broadly – Whether the first respondent is an affected person in terms of the second respondent’s application for resource consent.

 [2015] NZCA 617  CA 379/2014

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (Wendco (NZ) Ltd v Auckland Council [2015] NZCA 617).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the Auckland Council was required to give Wendco (NZ) Ltd notification of the resource consent application made by the Wiri Licensing Trust.


16 June 2016

Hearing

8 November 2016   

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and Ellen France JJ                                                     

 

 

Case Number

SC 15/2016

Case Name

Mangawhai Ratepayers’ and Residents’ Association Inc v Kaipara District Council

Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of ss 117–120 of the Local Government Act 2002 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the scope of the Kaipara District Council (Validation of Rates and Other Matters) Act 2013 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in awarding costs against the Association.

[2015] NZCA  612   CA 331/2014

Dates A   The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.  
B   The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.       

3 May 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 16/2016

Case Name

Janine Davina Sax v Luke Andrew Simpson and Luke Andrew Simpson and Janine Davina Sax as Trustees of the Luke and Janine Simpsons Family Trust

Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing an application for review of a decision of the Registrar of that Court to refuse to dispense with security for costs in relation to an appeal to that Court. 

[2016] NZCA 3  CA 388/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 17/2016

Case Name

Ivan Vladimir Joseph Erceg v Lynette Therese Erceg and Darryl Edward Gregory as Trustees of Acorn Foundation Trust and Lynette Therese Erceg and Darryl Edward Gregory as Trustees of Independent Group Trust

Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct test for requests by beneficiaries for access to trust documents – Whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct test for review of a trustee’s decision – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the High Court decision not to order disclosure of trust documents.  

[2016] NZCA 7   CA217/2015

 

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (Erceg v Erceg [2016] NZCA 7, [2016] 2 NZLR 622).                                                                   

B The approved question is:                                                   Should the conclusion that disclosure not be made/required be set-aside?                                                                                  

17 June 2016

Hearing

1 September 2016

Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ

 

 

Case Number

SC 18/2016

Case Name

Malcolm Edward Rabson v Wayne Seymour Chapman

Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in ordering costs against the applicant. 

[2016] NZCA 45  CA 855/2012

Dates A   The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.              
B   The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.

29 April 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 19/2016

Case Name

Graham D’Arcy-Smith v Natural Habitats Limited

Summary

Civil appeal – Whether the Employment Court erred in determining that the applicant was not an employee – Whether the Employment Court erred in not addressing a matter argued by the applicant.

[2015] NZEmpC 123  ARC 57/14

Dates The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant must pay costs of $500 to the respondent.

28 April 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 20/2016

Case Name New Zealand Aluminium Smelters Limited v Weller & Ors
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 7A of the Holidays Act 1981. 

[2016] NZCA 19    CA 313/2014

Dates A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondents.

27 August 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 21/2016

Case Name John Morgan MacKenzie v The Attorney-General
Summary

Civil Appeal – Limitation Act 1950 – Whether the High Court erred in its interpretation of the Limitation Act 1950.   

[2015] NZHC 1876   CIV 2012-470-000977 

Dates The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                     

1 June 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 22/2016

Case Name Isaac Paparoa v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the imposition of a Minimum Period of Imprisonment.

[2015] NZCA 234  CA 389/2014

Dates A  Extension of time for filing application for leave to appeal granted.
B  Application for leave to appeal dismissed.                           

30 May 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 23/2016

Case Name C v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.

[2016] NZCA 48  CA 287/2015 CA 161/2015

Dates

A  Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).

B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.

C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.

D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.


14 July 2016

Hearing

21 and 22 November 2016

 

 William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ.

 

 

Case Number

SC 24/2016

Case Name AL v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.

[2016] NZCA 48 CA 287/2015 CA 161/2015 

Dates

A  Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).

B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.

C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.

D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.


14 July 2016

Hearing

21 and 22 November 2016

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ

 

Case Number

SC 25/2016

Case Name SL v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury 

 [2016] NZCA 48  CA 162/2015

Dates

A  Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).

B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.

C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.

D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.


14 July 2016

Hearing

21 and 22 November 2016

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ

 

 

Case Number

SC 26/2016

Case Name KSC  v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.

 [2016] NZCA 48  CA 356/2015

Dates

Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.

15 April 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 27/2016

Case Name JBG  v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.

 [2016] NZCA 48  CA 160/2015

Dates

A  Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).

B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.

C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.

D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.


14 July 2016

Hearing

21 and 22 November 2016

 William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ.

 

 

Case Number

SC 28/2016

Case Name JPC  v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.

[2016] NZCA 48  CA 145/2015 

Dates

A  Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).

B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.

C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.

D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.


14 July 2016 

Hearing

21 and 22 November 2016

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ

 

 

Case Number

SC 29/2016

Case Name Anthony Pratt Kaye and Morva Kaye v Norris Ward McKinnon
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondents had not breached duty of care – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondents had not caused the applicants any loss.                                               

[2016] NZCA 32    CA333/2015

Dates A   The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.   
B   The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.

15 June 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 30/2016

Case Name KHW  v The Queen
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

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 31/2016

Case Name BM v The Queen
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 

Dates

The Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                     

20 June 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 32/2016

Case Name Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited
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

Dates

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

Hearing

10 and 11 October 2016                                                             

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ.

 

 

Case Number

SC 33/2016

Case Name Amanda Adele White and Anne Leoline Emily Freeman v Christopher Maurice Lynch and Stuart Gordon Spence
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    

Dates The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.                

17 May 2016
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 34/2016

Case Name Yong Xin Chen v The Cornwall Park Trust Board
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of a lease

[2016] NZCA 65  CA 645/2014

Dates 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
Hearing

15 November 2016

                                                            

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and Blanchard JJ.

 

 

Case Number

SC 35/2016

Case Name Michael Marino v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
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

Dates 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
Hearing

6 and 26 July 2016

Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ

Decision reserved

 

 

Case Number

SC 36/2016

Case Name Martin James Mailley v District Court at North Shore and New Zealand Police
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

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                     

20 June 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 37/2016

Case Name Francisc Catalin Deliu v Boon Gunn Hong
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

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500.

28 July 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 38/2016

Case Name Cecilia Victoria Uhrle v The Queen
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 

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                  

13 June 2016.

Hearing

 

 


Case Number

SC 39/2016

Case Name

Hamish McIntosh v John Howard Ross Fisk and David John Bridgman

 

Summary

Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the “gave value” defence pursuant to Allied Concrete v Meltzer [2015] NZSC 7 and s 296(3)(c) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the “alteration of position” defence in s 296(3)(c).          

[2016] NZCA 74   CA384/2015

Dates

A Leave to appeal and to cross-appeal is granted (McIntosh v Fisk  [2016] NZCA 74).         

B The approved questions are:

(i) Whether an order should have been made setting aside all or part of the payment made by Ross Asset Management Limited (RAM) to the applicant and requiring the applicant to pay the relevant amount to the respondents.

(ii) If so, whether the order should have been to set aside the payment of all of the $954,047 paid to the applicant or $454,047, being the difference between the amount paid to the applicant and the $500,000 he invested with RAM.                

26 May 2016

Hearing

27 July 2016                                                                                                                   
William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and Ellen France JJ

Decision reserved

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 40/2016

Case Name Wayne James Bracken v The Queen
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

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 41/2016

Case Name Mrinal Sardana  v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the jury’s verdict was not unreasonable – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no risk that outcome of trial was affected by error – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the sentence was not manifestly excessive.        

                                                   
[2016] NZCA 138   CA508/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 42/2016

Case Name Amanda Adele White and Anne Leoline Emily Freeman v Christopher Maurice Lynch and Stuart Gordon Spence
Summary

Civil Appeal – Judicature Act 1908, s 61A(2) - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the applicants had no further right of review.   

[2016] NZCA 149   CA 740/2015

Dates

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.               

17 May 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 43/2016

Case Name Augustine Lau v UMH Group Limited
Summary

Civil appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to grant an extension of time in which to appeal a High Court order extinguishing a land covenant.                   

[2016] NZCA 132   CA692/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 44/2016

Case Name  Vincent Ross Siemer v The Attorney-General
Summary

Civil Appeal – Judicature Act 1908, s 88B – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in expanding the scope of the order preventing the applicant from instituting civil proceedings without the leave of the High Court.  

[2016] NZCA 43   CA278/2014

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                   

B Costs of $2,500 are payable to thr respondent.                    

21 June 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 45/2016

Case Name Jesse Waiariki Tamanava Butler v North Shore Police
Summary

Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the application for an extension of time to appeal on the basis that the case was inarguable.                                                                              

[2016] NZCA 150   CA657/2015

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                  

13 June 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 46/2016

Case Name Vivien Judith Madsen-Ries and David Stuart Vance as Liquidators of Petranz Limited (in liquidation) and Petranz Limited (in liquidation) v Darrell Warren Karaneihana and Diana Joy Petera
Summary

Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s 161– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in taking into consideration that if the liquidators were successful that surplus funds would be returned to the directors and shareholders pursuant to Morgenstern v Jeffreys [2014] NZSC 176 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that ss 131–138 are codification of directors’ duties. 

[2016] NZCA 103   CA198/2015

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.


28 July 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 47/2016

Case Name Crocodile International PTE Limited v Lacoste
Summary

Civil Appeal – Trade Marks Act 2002, s 7(1)(a) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of s 7(1)(a) Trade Marks Act 2002.     

[2016] NZCA 111   CA607/2014

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (Crocodile International Pte Ltd v Lacoste [2016] NZCA 111).

B The approved question is:
Did the Court of Appeal err in upholding the High Court decision to set aside the order made by the Assistant Commissioner of Trade Marks revoking trade mark 70068?


19 July 2016

Hearing

30 August 2016

 William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and Ellen France JJ.

 

 

Case Number

SC 48/2016

Case Name New Zealand Air Line Pilots' Association Incorporated v Air New Zealand Limited
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the respondent’s appeal from the Employment Court was not barred for want of jurisdiction by reason of s 214(1) of the Employment Relations Act 2000 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Employment Court had wrongly applied or failed to apply orthodox principles of contractual interpretation.                 

[2016] NZCA 131   CA570/2014

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (Air New Zealand Limited v New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association Incorporated [2016] NZCA 131)


B The approved question is should the Court of Appeal have dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction?


13 July 2016

Hearing

17 October 2016

                                                                     

Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ

 

 

Case Number

SC 49/2016

Case Name H v The Queen
Summary

Criminal appeal – Whether the trial Judge erred in his directions to the jury with respect to reliability, the standard of proof, representative counts and depictions of victims of sexual violence.          

[2015] NZCA 124   CA533/2014

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                      

15 August 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 50/2016

Case Name Malcolm Raymond Clarke v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against conviction – Whether the trial Judge ought to have directed the jury that the applicant did not have the burden of proving that the complainant had a motive to lie.                                               

[2016] NZCA 91   CA586/2015

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                      

4 July 2016

Hearing

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 51/2016

Case Name Hilary Jane Calvert & HGW Trustees Ltd (as trustees of the Frongopoulos Trust & Anor) & Chris James v Grant Bruce REYNOLDS as liquidator of James Developments Ltd (in liquidation)
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 28 of the Limitation Act 1950 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the breadth of the discretion under s 301 of the Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in following Mana Property Trustee Ltd v James Development Ltd [2010] NZSC 90.                               

[2016] NZCA 151   CA173/2015

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants (jointly and severally) must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.


9 August 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 52/2016

Case Name T v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 30 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that exclusion of improperly obtained evidence would be disproportionate to the impropriety. 

[2016] NZCA 148   CA438/2015

Dates

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.                 

21 June 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 53/2016

Case Name N v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 30 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that exclusion of improperly obtained evidence would be disproportionate to the impropriety.                                                                           

[2016] NZCA 148   CA440/2015

Dates

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.                 

21 June 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 54/2016

Case Name Whetu Sonny James Waiwai v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its finding that the jury’s verdict was not unreasonable – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that evidence from a hostile Crown witness was admissible. 

[2016] NZCA 167   CA603/2015

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                      

13 July 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 55/2016

Case Name John Alfred Robinson v The Queen
Summary

Criminal appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 43(3)(e) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the “collusion or suggestibility” criterion in assessing admissibility of propensity evidence under s 43. 

[2016] NZCA 188   CA375/2015

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                 

13 July 2016

Hearing

  

 

Case Number

SC 56/2016

Case Name AN v Counties Manukau District Health Board
Summary

Civil Appeal – Habeas Corpus Act 2001 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not granting habeas corpus – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by making a costs award against the applicant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by suppressing the applicant’s name.

[2016] NZCA 226   CA133/2016

Dates
Hearing

 

  

Case Number

SC 57/2016

Case Name David Charles Browne and David Browne Contractors Limited and David Browne Mechanical Limited v David Ross Petterson as liquidator of Polyethylene Pipe Systems Limited (in liquidation)
Summary

Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to, and appreciation of, the evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of ss 295(a), 299(1) and 299(3) of the Companies Act 1993.        

[2016] NZCA 189   CA291/2015

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal by Mr Browne is dismissed.

B Leave to appeal is granted to David Browne Contractors Ltd and David Browne Mechanical Ltd.  The approved question is whether the orders for repayment ought to have been made against them.

C Costs are reserved.


16 August 2016

Hearing

 

  

Case Number

SC 58/2016

Case Name Morris Burton Suckling v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s 109 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 – Whether the District Court erred in failing to consider objections to the admissibility of propensity evidence. 

[2016] NZCA 187   CA468/2015

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                      

 4 July 2016

Hearing

 

  

Case Number

SC 59/2016

Case Name Wayne Anthony Jonathon Houpapa v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against sentence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not giving the defendant a discount for his guilty plea.                                               

[2016] NZCA 206   CA525/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

  

Case Number

SC 60/2016

Case Name B v Waitemata District Health Board
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the respondent’s smoke-free policy did not breach the applicant’s rights under the Bill of Rights Act 1990.                                                                   

[2016] NZCA 184   CA524/2013

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (B v Waitemata District Health Board [2016] NZCA 184).
B Costs are reserved.                                                               

 25 August 2016

Hearing

 

  

Case Number

SC 61/2016

Case Name ASG v Harlene Hayne
Summary

Civil appeal – Criminal procedure Act, s 200 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of "publication" under s 200 – Was information relied on by the employer obtained contrary to an order made under s 200 and if so, does it matter.  

[2016] NZCA 203   CA703/2014

Dates

A Leave to appeal is granted (ASG v Hayne [2016] NZCA 203)
B The approved questions are:
(i) Did the disclosure to the respondent of information relating to the applicant’s appearance in the District Court breach s 200 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011?  And, if so
(ii) Was it nonetheless open to the respondent to rely on and use that information in relation to the applicant?


18 August 2016

Hearing

 

   

Case Number

SC 62/2016

Case Name Leiden Cheyne O'Sullivan v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining an extension of time to appeal – Whether the applicant should be permitted to vacate his guilty pleas.  

[2016] NZCA 204   CA20/2016

Dates
Hearing

 

   

Case Number

SC 63/2016

Case Name Camille Iriana Thompson v The Attorney-General
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 compensation in relation to judicial acts. 

[2016] NZCA 215   CA590/2014

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 64/2016

Case Name Dean John Drever v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that there was not a miscarriage of justice– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the minimum period of imprisonment.  

[2016] NZCA 249   CA457/2014

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                        

27 July 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 65/2016

Case Name John Edward Whitehead and others (as trustees of J and R Whitehead Trust) and Shiloh Charitable Trust v Watson & Son Limited and Denis Eric Watson and Meryl Joy Watson (as trustees of Salem Charitable Trust of Masterton)
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their finding that the rental owed had been assigned and discharged – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that amounts owed under sale and purchase agreement could be set-off by amounts owed under rental agreement.           

[2016] NZCA 241   CA750/2014

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 66/2016

Case Name Michael Brian Ogden v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the error made by the District Court Judge in considering a formal written statement which was on the court file but had not been admitted in evidence was not so gross, prejudicial or irremediable as to render the trial unfair. 

[2016] NZCA 214   CA609/2015

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

                                                 

3 August 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 67/2016

Case Name Peter Alan Hutchins v The Queen
Summary

Criminal appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding no risk of miscarriage despite concluding that jury directions did not conform with best practice. 

[2016] NZCA 173   CA403/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 68/2016

Case Name Olivia Waiyee Lee v Whangarei District Council
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the limitation provisions of the Building Act 2004 and Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006.

[2016] NZCA 258   CA656/2015

Dates

A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Olivia Waiyee Lee v Whangarei District Council [2016] NZCA 258).
B The approved question is whether, in terms of s 37 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006, the application for an assessor’s report, “stopped the clock” for limitation purposes with regard to the proceedings against the respondent.
C In all other respects the application is dismissed.


3 August 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 69/2016

Case Name Murray Athold Osmond and Janet Doreen Osmond v David Murray Blanchett and Colin Thomas McCloy as liquidators of Arai Korp Limited (in liquidation)
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to hearing an appeal from summary judgment proceedings – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its evaluation of the evidence. 

[2016] NZCA 204   CA358/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 70/2016

Case Name Derek Peter Wheeldon and Carol Ann Wheeldon, Anthony John Butcher and Ruth Barbara Rogers, Larry Lawrence Small and KM Trustees Services Limited, Ivor Anthony Millington and Neville Eade v Body Corporate 342525
Summary

Civil Appeal –– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 138(1)(d) of the Unit Titles Act 2010 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 49(1) of the Building Act 2004 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the Building Code. 

[2016] NZCA 247   CA290/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 71/2016

Case Name Vijendra Kumar Naiker v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding no error in the trial judge’s decision not to discharge the jury – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the trial judge gave an adequate reliability warning.                                          

           

[2016] NZCA 250   CA562/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 72/2016

Case Name Auckland Council and James Hardie New Zealand v Weathertight Homes Tribunal, and The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and Body Corporate 19500, and Gefei Liang and Others
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the effect of s 141(4) of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 is that the multi-unit complex claim does not need to independently meet the s 16(a) eligibility criterion for resolution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the effect of s 141(4) of the 2006 Act is that all of the claimants represented in the multi-unit complex claim receive the benefit of the date the withdrawn claim was brought under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 for the purposes of s 37 of the 2006 Act.

[2016] NZCA 256   CA552/2015, CA564/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 73/2016

Case Name K v The Queen
Summary

Criminal appeal – Search and Surveillance Act 2012, s 15 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the warrant preference rule in the light of the Search and Surveillance Act, particularly ss 100 and 117.                           

[2016] NZCA 259   CA115/2016

Dates

Judgment released. Details, including result, are suppressed until final disposition of trial.                                                       

16 August 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 74/2016

Case Name Sara-Jane Skeet v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against her convictions for blackmail and kidnapping – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the elements of the offence of blackmail as set out in s 237 of the Crimes Act 1961.                                

[2016] NZCA 198   CA210/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 75/2016

Case Name Shahidan Nisha v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant’s knowledge of English was sufficient to ensure a fair trial.

 

[2016] NZCA 294   CA624/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 76/2016

Case Name Steven Ray Churchis v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge’s directions were adequate.                                                                

[2016] NZCA 264   CA391/2015

 

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 77/2016

Case Name David Obiaga v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no mistrial due to trial counsel error or juror ill-health – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no misuse of co-defendant’s statement – Whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding sentence. 

[2016] NZCA 270   CA390/2015, CA395/2015 

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 78/2016

Case Name Peter Anthony Williams v Trevor Nelson Cameron and Robin Whalley and Richards Woodhouse
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining an application for extension of time to appeal, on the basis that the applicant alleges that the respondents’ lawyers have acted in breach of Rules of Conduct and Client Care.   

 [2016] NZCA 317   CA136/2016

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 79/2016

Case Name Jeffrey Francis McClintock v The Attorney-General and Red Beach Board of Trustees
Summary

Civil appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its decision to reinstate but stay the proceedings until satisfaction of specified conditions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to make an order for costs.                                          

[2016] NZCA 274   CA175/2016  

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 80/2016

Case Name X v W and The Queen
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that it had no jurisdiction to appoint independent counsel to represent the applicant in criminal proceedings in respect of which he is the complainant.

CA731/2015 

Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.  

              

16 August 2016

Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 81/2016

Case Name Alistair Stuart Lyon v The Queen
Summary

 

 [2016] NZCA 293   CA746/2014

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 82/2016

Case Name Bodie Hoani Ngapaki Stewart v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Juries Act 1981, s 22– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that the trial Judge was not wrong to discharge the second juror. 

[2016] NZCA 217   CA27/2016

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 83/2016

Case Name Narayan Prasad v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that deficiencies in reliability warning did not lead to a miscarriage of justice – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no deficiencies in directions on previous acquittal evidence.                                                  

[2016] NZCA 163    CA695/2014

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 84/2016

Case Name Green Growth No. 2 Limited v Queen Elizabeth The Second National Trust
Summary

Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent was entitled to rectification of the covenant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the covenant was not invalid – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent’s notification of the covenant was not wrongful in terms of s 81 of the Land Transfer Act 1952.   

[2016] NZCA 308   CA47/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 85/2016

Case Name D v Immigration and Protection Tribunal New Zealand and  Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Summary

Civil appeal – Immigration Act 2009, s 249 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of s 249.  

[2016] NZCA 320   CA642/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 86/2016

Case Name Shivneel Shahil Kumar v The Queen
Summary

 

[2016] NZCA 329   CA264/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 87/2016

Case Name Bryne Permal v The Queen
Summary

 

[2016] NZCA 329   CA264/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 88/2016

Case Name Yao Wei He v Zhixiong Chen
Summary

Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to grant an application for leave to adduce further evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal of the decision of the High Court. 

[2016] NZCA 340   CA435/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 89/2016

Case Name PricewaterhouseCoopers v Robert Bruce Walker and John Marshall Scutter as liquidators of Property Ventures Limited, Five Mile Holdings Limited, Montecristo Construction Company Limited, Castle Street Ventures Limited, Livingspace Properties, Property Ventures Limited, and Five Mile Holdings Limited, and Cashel Ventures Limited, and Tay Ventures Limited, Livingspace Properties Limited, and Beechnest Ventures Limited, and Tuam Ventures Limited, and Castle Street Ventures Limited, and Lichfield Ventures Limited, and 92 Lichfield Limited, and St Asaph Ventures Limited, and Montecristo Construction Company Limited
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not finding an assignment of debt and security impermissible – Whether Court of Appeal erred in not finding proceedings to be an abuse of process.

[2016] NZCA 338   CA475/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 90/2016

Case Name Demissie Tefera Asgedom v The Queen
Summary

 

[2016] NZCA 334   CA451/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 91/2016

Case Name Nebiyou Tefera Demissie v The Queen
Summary

 

[2016] NZCA 334   CA533/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 92/2016

Case Name G v The Queen
Summary

Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 30 – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that information obtained from a third party without a search warrant or production order is admissible as evidence in the applicant’s trial. 

[2016] NZCA 390   CA161/2016

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Case Number

SC 93/2016

Case Name J v Accident Compensation Corporation
Summary

Civil Appeal – Accident Compensation Act 2001, s 103(2) – Whether High Court erred in holding the District Court was wrong to find that the applicant was unable because of personal injury to return to pre-injury employment.

 

[2016] NZHC 1683   CIV-2015-412-000125

Dates
Hearing

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 94/2016

Case Name Alexander Pieter van Heeren v Michael David Kidd
Summary

 

[2016] NZCA 401  CA 247/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

 

 

Case Number

SC 95/2016

Case Name Scott v Williams
Summary

 

[2016] NZCA 356  CA 58/2015

Dates
Hearing

 

 

Document Actions

New Zealand Government Online