Leave to appeal dismissed
Supreme Court cases where leave to appeal a judgment of a lower court was dismissed or deemed to be dismissed where a notice of abandonment was received.
Updated 28 November 2025
2014
Case name
Toese Tu’uaga v The Queen
Case number
SC 74/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge did not fail to put the defence case to the jury – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that there was no risk of a miscarriage of justice in the way in which the defence case as presented by trial counsel was described to the jury.[2014] NZCA 304 CA 82/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
20 November 2014
20 November 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TOESE TU'UAGA v R [2014] NZSC 164 [20 November 2014] (PDF, 71 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Razdan Rafiq v Commissioner of New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 75/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Security for costs – Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005, r 35(6) - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the Registrar’ s decision refusing to dispense with security for costs.[2014] NZCA 321 CA 210/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 plus all reasonable disbursements to the respondent.
26 September 2014
The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 plus all reasonable disbursements to the respondent.
26 September 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Hakaoro Hakaoro v The Queen
Case number
SC 76/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that it was open to the District Court Judge to rely upon an opinion expressed in the probation report that the applicant lacked remorse when there existed independent evidence to the contrary – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that it was open to the District Court Judge to rely solely on the opinion of the probation officer when deciding that home detention would not be granted.[2014] NZCA 310 CA 176/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 20 November 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
R v M and others
Case number
SC 77/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether certain procedural directions should have been made by the Court of Appeal.[2014] NZCA 304 CA 82/2014
Result
The application to file further submissions is declined. The interlocutory application of 1 December 2014 is dismissed.
Costs of $2,500 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M.
19 December 2014
______________
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014).
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Costs of $2,500 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M.
19 December 2014
______________
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014).
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Supreme court decision
N v M [2014] NZSC 189 [19 December 2014] (PDF, 95 KB)
Supreme court decision
N v M [2015] NZSC 15 [27 February 2015 (PDF, 164 KB)
Judgment appealed from
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
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
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
Page 7 of 12