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.
31 July 2026
Case information summary (as at 31 July 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 31 July 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 131 KB)
All years
Case name
Harry Memelink and Lynx Trustees Limited as Trustees of Link Trust (No 1) and Harry Memelink v Collins and May Law
Case number
SC 87/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overturning a High Court judgment that the respondent law firm was negligent in a conveying transaction.
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The first applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500. Given the position at [2], we make no costs award against the second applicant.
11 October 2019
B The first applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500. Given the position at [2], we make no costs award against the second applicant.
11 October 2019
Court of Appeal decision
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Eric Meserve Houghton v Timothy Ernest Corbett Saunders, Samuel John Magill, John Michael Feeney, Craig Edgeworth Horrocks, Peter David Hunter, Peter Thomas and Joan Withers, and Credit Suisse Private Equity Inc, and Credit Suisse First Boston Asian Me
Case number
SC 117/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the expert evidence as to the quantum of loss is admissible – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against a refusal to strike out the respondent’ s defence under s 63 of the Securities Act 1978 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the first respondents collectively and $2,500 to the second and third respondents collectively.
13 December 2019
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the first respondents collectively and $2,500 to the second and third respondents collectively.
13 December 2019
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Case name
Jinyue Young and Hsiang-Fen Ying v Zie Zhang
Case number
SC 4/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal to set aside the consent order – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appellant’s appeal against finding of contempt.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. B No order as to costs. 28 March 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
John William Ross v The Queen
Case number
SC 14/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s 122 of the Evidence Act 2006.
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
30 April 2018
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
30 April 2018
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JOHN WILLIAM ROSS v R [2018] NZSC 38 [30 April 2018] (PDF, 229 KB)
Case name
Phillip John Smith v Attorney General
Case number
SC 17/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that wearing a hairpiece does not constitute expression and therefore is not protected under s 14 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
7 May 2018
7 May 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Mark Robert Sandman v Colin Charles McKay, Roger David Cann and David John Clark
Case number
SC 35/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (McKay v Sandman [2018] NZCA 103, [2018] NZAR 707).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them.
7 August 2018
________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the respondents.
16 April 2019
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them.
7 August 2018
________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the respondents.
16 April 2019
Transcripts
- Hearing date 12 November 2018 (PDF, 568 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2019] NZSC 55 (PDF, 286 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
John Stephen Patrick v Bank of New Zealand
Case number
SC 43/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the High Court’s decision to grant summary judgment to the respondent.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
8 August 2018
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
8 August 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Philip Claude Tarr v Douglas John Sutcliffe and Terence Sutcliffe and Braden Matson as partners of Frost & Sutcliffe Lawyers
Case number
SC 46/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in striking out the applicant’s claim as an abuse of process.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondents.
31 July 2018
B Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondents.
31 July 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Phillip John Smith v The New Zealand Parole Board
Case number
SC 67/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether Court of Appeal Judge erred in upholding a Deputy-Registrar of that Court’s decision to refuse to dispense with security for costs.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent. 16 October 2018
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent. 16 October 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
R (SC 78/2018) v The King
Case number
SC 78/2018
Summary
Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of retrial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
Result
Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of retrial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted. 6 October 2023
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Page 34 of 50