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
James Hemi Biddle  v The Queen
Case number
SC 82/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Robbery – Criminal Procedure – Judge’s summing up – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up to jury on issues of credibility and reliability was appropriate – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up did not give rise to miscarriage of justice.[2008] NZCA 398  CA 243/2008   30 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal refused.

5 December 2008.

 Hearing

7 July 2009

 Result
Appeal dismissed.

16 July 2009

Case name
James Michael Leuluaiali’i v The Queen
Case number
SC 1/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – appellant convicted as party to attempted murder and murder – appeal by a co-accused had been allowed on grounds of error in summing up in relation to parties; like errors in present case – appeal allowed in relation to attempted murder – in relation to murder the proviso to s 385(1) applied and appeal dismissed – whether application of the proviso led to a substantial miscarriage of justice. CA 122/06 22 November 2006
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 30 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
John Anthony Waller and Richard Dale Agnew v Stephen John Davies and others
Case number
SC 20/2007
Summary
Civil – applicants were appointed statutory managers of CH Finance Ltd pursuant to the Corporations (Investigation and Management) Act 1989 – CH Finance had devised a money lending scheme targeted at homeowners – CH Finance had become the registered proprietor of twelve properties pursuant to this scheme – properties mortgaged variously to the second to sixth respondents – statutory managers applied to the High Court pursuant to s 58 of that Act for directions relating to the twelve properties – statutory managers appealed that decision, cross-appeal by first respondent – statutory managers seek leave to appeal Court of Appeal decision - whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the statutory managers’ application for directions under s 58 of the Corporations (Investigation and Management) Act 1989 without providing directions or without remitting the application to the High Court for further directions – whether homeowners have an equitable interest arising out of fraudulent misrepresentations made to them – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that counsel for the first respondent had not conceded that fraudulent misrepresentations had been made – whether the homeowners have an equitable interest arising out of a common law mortgage or an option to purchase – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that first respondent not guilty of fraud under the Land Transfer Act 1952 on the basis that homeowners had no equitable interest to defeat – whether the second to fifth respondents were guilty of fraud by way of imputation and/or attribution –whether costs in respect of the homeowners whose properties were transferred by forgery should be determined by the High Court or Court of Appeal. CA 65/05 7 March 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs of $2,000 to first respondent, and $2,000 to second to sixth respondents as a group, plus disbursements. 13 June 2007
Case name
James Arthur Rose v Karen Diane Rose
Case number
SC 73/2007
Summary
Civil – Property (Relationships) Act 1976 – whether a partnership interest is an asset for the purposes of the Act – whether improvements to land that is relationship property form part of that land by operation of Land Transfer Act 1952 definition of “land” – whether increases in value to property caused by inflation are within the scope of claims under s 9A(1) or 9A(2) – whether s 9A(2) claim required evidence of an action by the respondent that had the effect of increasing the value of the property – whether s 2G requires assets and liabilities to be valued at the same date. [2007] NZCA 406 CA 212/06 11 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
6 December 2007
___________________________
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
19 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave granted

Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Phillip Hans Field v Malcolm James Burgess
Case number
SC 87/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – sentencing – Court of Appeal quashed the sentence of six and a half years imposed by the District Court judge and replaced it with a sentence of eight years – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to increase the sentence imposed in the District Court – in particular, whether courts are obliged to accept eight years as the starting point in cases of sexual violation by rape – whether a guilty plea made after the complainant has given evidence is necessarily less worthy than a guilty plea that spares the complainant the need to give evidence – whether a guilty plea entered part way through trial by one accused is of assistance to the Crown with respect to bolstering the credibility of the complainant’ s evidence – whether the trial judge has an unfettered right to enter a merciful sentence – whether the Court of Appeal made material factual errors – whether the Court of Appeal’s approach has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.[2007] NZCA 550 CA 511/07 29 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 17 December 2007
Case name
Trustee Executors Limited v Peter James Murray and others and Morel & Co Ltd and Jennifer Ann Morel
Case number
SC 15/2006
Summary
Civil - allotment of participatory securities - 'payment' of minimum amount within 4 months of registered prospectus - whether the tender and acceptance of a cheque on terms that it be held and its value offset against the amount payable to its drawer on settlement can "be deemed to have been paid" within the meaning of Securities Act 1978, s 37(2)(a) - whether statutory supervisor owes common law duty of care in addition to duty to exercise reasonable diligence imposed by statutory implication and Deed of Participation - whether a duty as trustee of funds received pursuant to an offer of securities can be imposed in addition to an express duty as statutory supervisor - whether exclusion clause in Deed of Participation can exclude liability except for breach of the statutory implied duty to exercise reasonable diligence - whether negligent or inadvertent breach of trust can amount to (equitable) fraud for the purposes of Limitation Act 1950, s 28. CA 86/04 22 December 2005
Result
4 April 2006 – Leave to Appeal granted
Case name
Peter James Murray and others and Morel & Co Ltd and Jennifer Ann Morel
Case number
SC 17/2006
Summary
Civil - allotment of participatory securities - numerous causes of actions brought against respondents alleging, among other things, an allotment in breach of Securities Act 1978, s 37(2), and issuing a prospectus containing untrue statements in breach of Securities Act 1978, s 56 - causes of action struck out as an abuse of process, being time barred pursuant to the Limitation Act 1950 - whether the doctrine of “reasonable discoverability” should apply to all causes of action. CA 86/04 22 December 2005
Result
4 April 2006 – Leave to Appeal granted
Case name
Anthony Keith Peters v The Queen
Case number
SC 23/2006
Summary
Criminal law - appeal against order by Court of Appeal that there be a joint trial of applicant and another - whether trials of two accused on one count of murder should be severed - right to a fair trial - whether discretion of trial judge should have been interfered with - duty of Court of Appeal to give reasons - whether this Court has jurisdiction to hear an appeal against a pre-trial determination by the Court of Appeal. CA 430/05 22 March 2005CA
Result
Leave to Appeal dismissed.
7 June 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Alistair James Haskett v The Queen
Case number
SC 34/2006
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction for driving at a speed exceeding 100 kilometres per hour – use of speed camera image as evidence of offence – whether production of image purporting to be taken by approved vehicle surveillance equipment is sufficient evidence to prove offence – requirements for testing and accuracy of approved vehicle surveillance equipment – Land Transport Act 1998, ss 145, 146 CA 261/05 30 March 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
3 July 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Anthony Kevin Peters v The Queen
Case number
SC 52/2006
Summary
Criminal –application to appeal directly from High Court – applicant tried jointly with co-accused after Court of Appeal allowed appeal by Solicitor-General against severance of trials – legal test to be applied by Court of Appeal in determining appeals against exercise of discretion by trial Court – whether joint trial denied applicant a fair hearing. CRI 2005 –009 – 5245 High Court Christchurch
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
26 September 2006