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.

28 November 2025

Case information summary 2025 (as at 28 November 2025) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary 2025 (as at 28 November 2025)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 120 KB)

All years

Case name
Mana PropertyTrustee Ltd v James Development Ltd
Case number
SC 105/2009
Summary
Civil – Interpreting terms of a sale and purchase agreement  – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by equating non-performance at the time of settlement with an automatic right to cancel – Whether the Court of Appeal were wrong to find that clause 18.3 of the agreement for sale and purchase was essential.[2009] NZCA 483    CA  241/2000  19 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 March 2010
______________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the respondent’ s purported cancellation on 3 November 2008 of its contract with the appellant was of no effect.  The proceeding is remitted to the High Court for outstanding issues to be determined in light of this judgment.  The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. Costs are reserved.  Counsel should file memoranda. 
23 July 2010
Case name
MA v The Attorney General
Case number
SC 106/2009
Summary
Civil – the applicant was granted recognition of status as a refugee in 1996 and New Zealand citizenship in 1997 – in 2001 the applicant was discharged on the offence of making a false statement in his refugee claim – certain documents obtained by the Police in a search of the applicant’ s home were passed to the Refugee Status Branch of the New Zealand Immigration Service – in 2006 notice was given to the applicant of intended determination of revocation of refugee status – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the search of the applicant’s home was lawful – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that privilege did not attach to certain communications between the applicant and his refugee advisor – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that Police lawfully provided certain documents to the New Zealand Immigration Service.[2009] NZCA 490    CA  565/2007  20 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 31 March 2010
Case name
Attorney-General v Tamil X v Refugee Status Appeals Authority  and Y
Case number
SC 107/2009
Summary
Immigration – whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting Article 1F of the  1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees; whether the Court erred in not remitting an Article 1F inquiry to the Refugee Status Appeals Authority[2009] NZCA 488    CA  109/2008  20 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
10 March 2010
__________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The respondent’s application for recognition of refugee status is remitted to the Refugee Status Appeals Authority for consideration in accordance with the Court of Appeal’s order.
C Costs are reserved and counsel may submit memoranda if necessary.
27 August 2010
Case name
Dean Noble v The Queen
Case number
SC 108/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Assault – Sexual Violation – Whether Court of Appeal erred in law in its findings regarding admissibility and credibility – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s irregular jury directions on previous inconsistent statements could not have, either on their own or in conjunction with any of the other alleged errors, have affected the trial result and led to a miscarriage of justice on a R v Matenga [2009] 3 NZLR 145 analysis.[2009] NZCA 507    CA  633/2008  23 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
16 July 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Adrian Stanley Budd v The Queen
Case number
SC 109/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – Sexual offences – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding there was no miscarriage of justice within s 385(1) (c) Crimes Act 1961 on the basis trial counsel was not incompetent.  [2009] NZCA 419     CA  747/2008 21 September  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
12 July 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Edward Woodrow Collins v The Queen
Case number
SC 110/2009
Summary
Criminal – Conspiracy to manufacture Class A drug – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge gave proper jury directions on the evidence of co-conspirators – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not ruling whether there was reasonable evidence that the applicant adhered to the conspiracy.[2009] NZCA 519    CA  119/2009    4 November  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
2 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Alan Stanley Perkins and Adrieene Rosemary Perkins v Tere Moana Purea and Tom Tangi-Tuake and June Tangi-Tuake
Case number
SC 111/2009
Summary
Civil – Land Transfer Act 1952 – the appellants sued for specific performance after the respondent failed to settle a house purchase due to a dispute with his daughter over ownership which resulted in her lodging a caveat against the title of the property – whether, in light of s 182 of the Land Transfer Act 1952, the Court of Appeal erroneously approached the matter by way of contest between competing equities – whether the Court of Appeal should have held that registration is conclusive and that the appellants, as bona fide purchasers for value without notice of the daughter’ s equitably interest, should take the property notwithstanding that the daughter’ s equitable interest was earlier in time – alternatively, whether the Court of Appeal erred in the approach they adopted in consideration of the hierarchy of equities.[2009] NZCA 541    CA  365/2008   18 November  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the 2nd Respondent.
4 March 2010
Case name
Stephen Leslie Jellyman v The Queen
Case number
SC 112/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – whether the sentence of preventive detention was manifestly excessive; Whether the appellant’s right to silence and right against self-incrimination were breached by admitting the appellant’ s videotaped statement to police; Whether the complainant, who was intellectually disadvantaged, understood either the oath or the moral or legal consequences of not telling the truth and thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice; Whether the complainant’s unsworn evidence was admissible.[2009] NZCA 532    CA  6/2009   12  November  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
12 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Slawomir Ryszard Bujak v The Minister of Justice
Case number
SC 113/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Extradition – Judicial Review – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding Minister not obliged to take account of the appellant’s state of health and humanitarian concerns raised on appellant’ s behalf in making his decision under s 30 of the Extradition Act 1999 and Art 1 of the Extradition Treaty between Poland and New Zealand – Whether Court of Appeal gave inappropriate weight to evidence of appellant’s doctor and erred in concluding appellant’s ailments were not a basis on which to stop or delay an extradition.[2009] NZCA 570    CA  719/2009    4 December  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondent. 11 February 2010
Case name
Contract Pacific Limited v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 114/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Taxation – Whether the Commissioner satisfied the time limits contained in s 46 of the Goods and Services Tax Act 1985 – Whether Contract Pacific had already been paid a refund for the purposes of s 241 (6) (a) of the Taxation (Taxpayer Assessment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2001. [2009] NZCA 568    CA  759/2009   4 December  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
4 March 2010
__________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent, plus disbursements.
16 November 2010