Supreme Court case information

Civil appeal - application for leave to bring an appeal

A The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
B The applications to file reply submissions are dismissed.
C The applications for stay of execution are dismissed.
D The application to admit new evidence is dismissed.
E The first applicant must pay each respondent costs of $2,500.
1 May 2026
_________________________________________
A The application for recall of this Court’s judgments of 1 May  2026 (Chen v Goodmore Investments (New Zealand) Ltd [2026] NZSC 40) and 8 May 2026 (Chen v Goodmore Investments (New Zealand) Ltd [2026] NZSC 54) is dismissed. 
B The first applicant must pay the respondent in SC 175/2025 and SC 2/2026 costs of $1,200. 
C The Registrar is directed not to accept for filing any further applications for recall in this proceeding.
26 May 2026
______________________________________________________________________________
The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 1 May 2026 (Chen v Goodmore Investments (New Zealand) Ltd [2026] NZSC 40) is dismissed.
8 May 2026

Civil appeal - application for leave to bring an appeal

A The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
B The applications to file reply submissions are dismissed.
C The applications for stay of execution are dismissed.
D The application to admit new evidence is dismissed.
E The first applicant must pay each respondent costs of $2,500.
1 May 2026
____________________________________________
A The application for recall of this Court’s judgments of 1 May  2026 (Chen v Goodmore Investments (New Zealand) Ltd [2026] NZSC 40) and 8 May 2026 (Chen v Goodmore Investments (New Zealand) Ltd [2026] NZSC 54) is dismissed. 
B The first applicant must pay the respondent in SC 175/2025 and SC 2/2026 costs of $1,200. 
C The Registrar is directed not to accept for filing any further applications for recall in this proceeding.
26 May 2026
______________________________________________________________________________
The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 1 May 2026 (Chen v Goodmore Investments (New Zealand) Ltd [2026] NZSC 40) is dismissed.
8 May 2026

Civil appeal 

A Leave to appeal is granted in part (Estate of Ruru v Attorney- General [2025] NZCA 597).
B The approved questions are:
   (a) whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to the requirements for resumption in s 8HB of the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975; and
   (b) whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to the Waitangi Tribunal’s discretion to award compensation under sch 1 of the Crown Forest Assets Act 1989.
C The application for leave to appeal is otherwise dismissed.
10 June 2026

Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

A notice of abandonment having been filed, the application for leave to appeal is abandoned.
10 March 2026

Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
4 June 2026

Civil Appeal

A The applications for extensions of time to apply for leave to appeal are granted.
B Leave to appeal is granted (J v Attorney-General [2023] NZCA 660).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals.
18 April 2024
__________________________________________________

A The appeal is allowed in part.  The approach of the Court of Appeal to s 85 of the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003 was incorrect.  The Family Court, in considering this matter in the context of a review under Part 6 of the Act, is to address J’s condition and status in accordance with our approach to s 85.    

B The further evidence described below at [156] is admitted.  

C The application for recall of this Court’s leave judgment of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, T v Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is allowed only to clarify the matters which are properly before the Court.

D The judgment of this Court of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, Tv Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is reissued accordingly.

E Costs are reserved.                                                                                                                        

15 August 2025

Civil Appeal

A The applications for extensions of time to apply for leave to appeal are granted.
B Leave to appeal is granted (J v Attorney-General [2023] NZCA 660).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals.
18 April 2024
_______________________________________

A The appeal is allowed in part.  The approach of the Court of Appeal to s 85 of the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003 was incorrect.  The Family Court, in considering this matter in the context of a review under Part 6 of the Act, is to address J’s condition and status in accordance with our approach to s 85.    

B The further evidence described below at [156] is admitted.  

C The application for recall of this Court’s leave judgment of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, T v Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is allowed only to clarify the matters which are properly before the Court.

D The judgment of this Court of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, Tv Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is reissued accordingly.

E Costs are reserved.                                                                                                                         15 August 2025