Mark Moncrieff Stevens and others v Premium Real Estate Limited

Civil Appeal – Breach of fiduciary duty and Fair Trading Act 1986 – Damages – Advertising and sale of residential property where absence full disclosure by agent to principal of close, ongoing commercial relationship with purchaser – Whether Court of Appeal erred in quantification of damages assessment, including whether correct measure of loss includes profit made by third party (rather than fiduciary) as result of breach of fiduciary duty.

[2008] NZCA 82 CA 31/07 11 April 2008

Carolyn Rochelle Taylor v The Queen

Criminal – Appeal against conviction on three charges of unlawful possession of airgun, assisting escape from lawful custody and kidnapping – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding prisoner Appellant assisted to escape (AT) was in lawful custody.
[2007] NZCA 318 CA 40/07 27 July 2007

Big River Paradise Limited v Robin Lance Congreve and others

Civil Appeal – Breach of fiduciary duty and Fair Trading Act 1986 – Damages – Advertising and sale of residential property where absence full disclosure by agent to principal of close, ongoing commercial relationship with purchaser – Whether Court of Appeal erred in quantification of damages assessment, including whether correct measure of loss includes profit made by third party (rather than fiduciary) as result of breach of fiduciary duty.

[2008] NZCA 78 CA 135/06 9 April 2008

Alan Ivor Greer v The Queen

Summary Criminal appeal – bail – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to refuse the appellant’s application for bail pending hearing of his appeal against sentence – whether undue delay in processing the appeal has hindered the appellant’s ability to prepare for his appeal against sentence – whether inadequate facilities available to the appellant as a sentenced prisoner have prevented the appellant from adequately preparing for the appeal.

[2008] NZCA 90 CA 179/06 17 April 2008

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
9 May 2008

Arthur William Taylor v The Queen

CRI 2005 085 5744 19 December 2007

Shaun Antony King v The Queen

Criminal – appeal by way of case stated – Juries Act 1981 – applicant challenges the legality and fairness of jury-vetting, under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Privacy Act 1993 and the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 – whether controls should operate over prosecution use of information including, but not limited to, the criminal history of a potential jury member – whether disclosure by the prosecution to the defence should be required in relation to such information.

[2008] NZCA 79 CA 207/2007 10 April 2008

Ahmad Zanzoul v The Queen

Criminal appeal – applicant convicted after pleading guilty pursuant to s 153A of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 on an information laid under s 31(1)(f)(ii) of the Passports Act 1992 – sentenced to 15 months imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention – whether the conviction and sentence is a nullity for want of legal certainty or vagueness of the provisions dealing with the indictable and summary jurisdiction for penalty purposes – alternatively, whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by constructing the legislation to the applicant’s detriment in failing to apply the lesser penalty where the legislation was “complex and confusing” – additionally, whether admissions were obtained without informing the applicant of his rights not to incriminate himself, to silence, and to obtain a lawyer in breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether, under art 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations read in conjunction with the Refugee Convention, the applicant should, as a refugee claimant, have been provided on detainment with advice by a consular or appropriate international official – whether a Hansen declaration should be made with regard to this issue – whether the applicant’s hearing before the Refugee Status Appeals Authority was unlawful for lack of independence and impartiality on the principles of Charanjit Singh v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] ScotCS 342 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in fact and law in finding and taking into account that there is nothing linking the appellant’s possession of a false Australian passport with his claim for refugee status – whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in taking into account that the applicant was not in the situation of many refugee claimants – application for name suppression.

CA 297/06 6 December 2006

Media 1 Limited v N W Shanks and Wilson McKay Trustee Company and ors

Civil – validity of termination of lease – whether notice of termination of lease was sufficiently clear and unambiguous as to how and when the termination would operate and what steps were required by the other party to prevent the termination – whether the Court of Appeal was right to assume that the phrase in the notice “pursuant to its rights” was an invocation of the termination provisions of the lease – whether the reaction of the recipient and their legal advisors to the notice was relevant to the interpretation of the validity of the notice.
[2008] NZCA 77 CA292/07 5 March 2008

Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondent.
7 May 2008

Ngai Tahu Properties Lmited v Central Plains Water Trust and Canterbury Regional Council
Summary

Civil – Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) – competing resource consent applications to take (and use) water from a finite natural resource – whether the Court of Appeal majority assessed the priority of claims correctly – whether the “ready for notification” test should apply in such cases – how a consent authority decision not to proceed with notification under s 91 RMA should affect priority of claims.

[2008] NZCA 71 CA69/07 19 March 2008

Jonathan Nuki Lummis Jarden v The Queen

Criminal Appeal – conspiracy to supply methamphetamine – appeal against sentence - whether a Court should use sentencing guidelines based on actual supply of specified weights of drugs when considering a sentence for conspiracy to supply an unspecified quantity of drugs - whether the Court of Appeal considered such a distinction when dismissing the appeal to that Court

[2008] NZCA 48 CA292/07 5 March 2008

New Zealand Exchange Limited v Bank of New Zealand, Access Brokerage Limited (in liquidation) and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu

[2008] NZCA 25 CA236/06 22 February 2008

Timothy Justin Nevin v The Queen

Timothy Justin Nevin v The Queen
Criminal – appeal against conviction – charges of assault with a weapon and possession of an offensive weapon – whether Court of Appeal erred in its consideration of other cases involving inconsistent verdicts – whether Court of Appeal erred in its analysis of evidence given at trial.

SC 11/2008

Robert Charles De Bruin v The Queen
Criminal appeal – applicant’s indictment was amended after his preliminary hearing to provide that he would be charged jointly with his co-accused – whether applicant had standing to attend the preliminary hearing of his co-accused – whether applicant’s inability to do so rendered his trial unfair so that a miscarriage of justice has occurred.

[2007] NZCA 600 CA 296/06 21 December 2007

Appeal against order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 1991 - Court of Appeal held that the High Court had correctly calculated a pecuniary penalty order under s 25 of $1 million – whether first appellant more than a mere courier for the purposes of calculating the benefit received under s 27(2) – whether Court of Appeal wrong to follow R v Penderson [1995] 2 NZLR given position of couriers has not been resolved – whether Court of Appeal in error in upholding the High Court decision that the increase in value of the property was a benefit from the offending under s 28 – whether Court of Appeal was correct in finding that the appellants’ agreement under s 21 of the Property (Relationships) Act 2004 was intended to defeat the interests of the Crown as a creditor of the appellant – whether, given the second appellant’s appeal was successful in part, the Court of Appeal erred in ordering that the legal costs should be paid from the second appellant’s interest in the property.

[2007] NZCA 600 CA 332/06 21 December 2007

SC 9/2008

Robert Charles De Bruin v The Queen
Appeal against order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 1991 - Court of Appeal held that the High Court had correctly calculated a pecuniary penalty order under s 25 of $1 million – whether first appellant more than a mere courier for the purposes of calculating the benefit received under s 27(2) – whether Court of Appeal wrong to follow R v Penderson [1995] 2 NZLR given position of couriers has not been resolved – whether Court of Appeal in error in upholding the High Court decision that the increase in value of the property was a benefit from the offending under s 28 – whether Court of Appeal was correct in finding that the appellants’ agreement under s 21 of the Property (Relationships) Act 2004 was intended to defeat the interests of the Crown as a creditor of the appellant – whether, given the second appellant’s appeal was successful in part, the Court of Appeal erred in ordering that the legal costs should be paid from the second appellant’s interest in the property.

[2007] NZCA 600 CA 317/06 21 December 2007

4 April 2008

Neville James Gibson v Minter Ellison Rudd Watts

Civil Appeal – proceedings against former legal counsel - whether the Court of Appeal made accurate findings of fact – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the respondent had complied with discovery obligations – whether the Court of Appeal had regard to all relevant evidence – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to find that the applicant would not have been entitled to legal aid in earlier proceedings against a third party – whether the respondent had a conflict of interest in earlier proceedings - whether the Court should have considered the applicant’s financial position when awarding costs against him

[2007] NZCA 595 CA 202/065, CA 33/06 21 December 2007

Elders New Zealand Limited v PGG Wrightson Lmited

Civil – Contract Law – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that an amalgamation approved under Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993 has the legal consequences provided for in s 219 of that Act – Whether an amalgamating company is entitled to “pick and choose” between Part 13 and Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993 – Whether the terms of the amalgamation order created the effect prescribed in Part 13 even though the order was made pursuant to Part 15 – Whether the applicant was bound by the Part 15 order although the order did not state that the applicant was bound.

[2007] NZCA 596 CA 277/06 21 December 2007

Shell (Petroleum Mining) Company Limited and others v Todd Petroleum Mining Company Limited and others

Civil Appeal – Civil Procedure – Injunction – Contract – Breach – Remedies – Whether Court of Appeal correct to conclude overall contractual arrangements mean STOS not entitled to resign as Maui field Operator and Shell not entitled to encourage its STOS directors to vote in favour of resolution removing STOS as Operator – Whether Court of Appeal correct to conclude MDL/STOS contract of employment enforceable by Todd – Whether injunctive relief, rather than damages, correct remedy for any contract breach proved.

[2007] NZCA 586 CA 144/06 18 December 2007

Philip Joseph Fava v Ekhlas Zaghloul and others

Civil appeal – Insolvency Act 1967 – High Court declined to approve a composition in satisfaction of debts due to creditors by a bankruptee on the grounds that the composition was not reasonable or calculated to benefit the general body of creditors under s 122(3)(b) - Court of Appeal upheld the decision under s 122(3)(b) and also on the basis that the composition was not expedient to be approved under s 122(3)(d) – whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to allow the appellant the opportunity to make written submissions on the issue of expediency – whether the decision based on expediency was wrong in law.

[2007] NZCA 594 CA 568/07 21 December 2007

7April 2008

A v The Queen

 Criminal – applicant convicted of sexual violation by rape – victim was applicant’s three-year-old daughter – charges were brought after victim was diagnosed with gonorrhoea. Whether alleged expert evidence, supporting the possibility of non-sexual transmission of the disease, renders the conviction unsafe – application for leave to appeal out of time due to newly available evidence.

CA 508/04 28 November 2005

9 April 2008

Matini Vaihu v The Attorney-General

Civil Appeal – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act – Breach – Remedies – Damages – Torture or cruel or degrading or disproportionately severe treatment – Kidney dialysis patient, V, bitten by Police dog – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding bite inadvertent, not deliberate and lawful, so as to relieve Attorney-General of liability for actions of Police dog under control of handler – Whether bite of innocent bystander by Police dog under control of handler constitutes breach of s 9.

[2007] NZCA 574 CA 180/06 13 December 2007

John Bevan-Smith v Raupo Publishing (NZ) Limited

Civil Appeal – breach of contract – book publication - whether Court of Appeal should have granted extension of time to file case on appeal – whether agreement between applicant and defendant void because of deceptive conduct – whether the defendant breached due diligence obligations in contract - whether the Court received misleading evidence regarding the motive’s of the defendant – whether High Court made correct findings of fact especially regarding timing of events – whether the Court of Appeal should have reconsidered findings of fact made by the High Court – whether High Court correctly interpreted relevant clauses in contract –whether quantum of lost book sales correctly calculated – whether case should be remitted to the Court of Appeal to be reheard or to the High Court for a new trial.

[2007] NZCA 579 CA 57/07 14 December 2007

9 April 2008

Ross Francis Hookway v The Queen

Criminal appeal – whether trial counsel is required to inform an accused of his or her right to instruct counsel and for counsel to be bound by those instructions – whether trial Judge was correct to give a Papadopoulos direction when the jury appeared to be deadlocked.

[2007] NZCA 567 CA 466/06 11 December 2007

9 April 2008