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.
19 June 2026
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 89 KB)
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 126 KB)
All years
Case name
Nathan Stanley Gedye v Colin Robert South, Diane Lee South and Richard James Bureel as Trustees of the South Family Trust
Case number
SC 56/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Building Act 1991 – Alleged breach of vendor warranty for compliance with the Act – interpretation of limitation defence in s 91(2) of the Act – the Court of Appeal held the “act or omission on which the proceedings are based” to be the giving of the contractual warranty rather than the building work itself – the 10 year limitation period in s 91(2) therefore did not bar the respondent’s claim – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding s 91(2) inapplicable[2010] NZCA 207 CA 567/2009 20 May 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
5 October 2010.
Case name
Robert Erwood v Janet Maxted and others
Case number
SC 66/2010
Result
The appeal is allowed.
The appeal to the Court of Appeal is reinstated. The proceeding is remitted to the Court of Appeal for hearing.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside.
18 March 2011
____________________________
The application by the first respondents for recall is dismissed.
15 July 2011
____________________________
Application by the appellant for recall is dismissed.
25 November 2015
The appeal to the Court of Appeal is reinstated. The proceeding is remitted to the Court of Appeal for hearing.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside.
18 March 2011
____________________________
The application by the first respondents for recall is dismissed.
15 July 2011
____________________________
Application by the appellant for recall is dismissed.
25 November 2015
Recall judgment
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Recall judgment
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Case name
Ratima James O'Donnell @ Ratima Joseph Osborne v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether guilty plea was entered in error causing a miscarriage of justice.[2010] NZCA 372 CA 179/2008 16 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
10 November 2010
Case name
Kent James Bond v The Queen
Case number
SC 91/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether evidence was admissible – Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury in summing up – Whether the sentence was excessive.[2010] NZCA 381 CA 109/2010 18 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BOND v R SC 91/2010 [23 November 2010] (PDF, 43 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
23 November 2010
Case name
Winston James Shane Young v The Queen
Case number
SC 95/2010
Summary
Criminal appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the appellant’s conviction; whether the trial judge erred in his summing up to the jury; whether guilty verdict unreasonable.[2010] NZCA 309 CA 555/2009 19 July 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
YOUNG v R SC 95/2010 [8 December 2010] (PDF, 44 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal refused.
8 December 2010
Case name
Kimberley Birkenfeld v Anthony Bruce Kendall and Yachting New Zealand Inc
Case number
SC 7/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – damages claim in negligence following boating accident causing physical injury to the applicant – permanent stay ordered in Court of Appeal – whether Court of Appeal failed to consider issues before it – whether Court of Appeal should give reasons in relation to issues that did not need to be decided in order to dismiss the appeal – whether Court of Appeal sufficiently accommodated the applicant’s disabilities.[2008] NZCA 531 CA 570/2007 4 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs $2500 to the respondents jointly. 1 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BIRKENFELD v KENDALL SC 7/2009 [1 July 2009] (PDF, 17 KB)
Judgment appealed from
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
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
Media Releases
- sc 105 2009 mana v james 23 july 2010 (PDF, 85 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Substantive judgment /Media release
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Neville James Gibson v Minter Ellison Rudd Watts
Case number
SC 8/2008
Summary
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
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2.500 to respondent. 1 May 2008
Case name
Kevin Anthony Lenaghan v The Queen
Case number
SC 24/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – possessing a substance with the intention of using it to produce or manufacture a controlled drug - whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that there was adequate evidence to support the jury’s conclusion of possession of a substance – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge gave adequate jury directions.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LENAGHAN v R SC 24/2008 [21 July 2008] (PDF, 16 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
21 July 2008
21 July 2008
Case name
Christopher James Fullbeck Mosley v The Queen
Case number
SC 58/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – trial took place with ten jurors – whether the Court of Appeal erred in confirming that there were “exceptional circumstances relating to the trial” which justified continuing with ten jurors under s 374 Crimes Act 1961 – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to conclude that s 374(8) excluded a right to review the trial Judge’ s decision to discharge the 12th and 11th jurors.[2008] NZCA 319 CA 612/2007 25 August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MOSLEY v R SC 58/2008 [17 November 2008] (PDF, 17 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
17 November 2008.
Page 16 of 19