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.
22 September 2026
Case information summary (as at 18 September 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 112 KB)
Case information summary (as at 18 September 2026) – Currently unavailable
All years
Case name
Robert John Herd and Rhumba Holdings Limited v Rodney David Haines Kathleen Anne Norman
Case number
SC 80/2020
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay the respondents costs of $2,500.
21 December 2020
B The applicants must pay the respondents costs of $2,500.
21 December 2020
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Michael John Denney v The Queen
Case number
SC 83/2020
Summary
Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 9 June 2017 (Denney v R [2017] NZSC 85) is dismissed.
22 December 2020
22 December 2020
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
James Charles Stringer v Colin Graeme Craig, Helen Ruth Craig, Angela Maria Storr, Kevin Eric Stitt and Stephen Dylan Taylor
Case number
SC 96/2020
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal.
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
C The applicant must pay the first respondent costs of $2,500.
16 February 2021
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
C The applicant must pay the first respondent costs of $2,500.
16 February 2021
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Leticia Margaret Drake and Gavin John Steward v Commissioner of New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 97/2020
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
1 March 2021
1 March 2021
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Matthew John Young v The Queen
Case number
SC 16/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against conviction.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
6 December 2019
6 December 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Robert John Solomon Grace v The Queen
Case number
SC 19/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction and sentence.
Result
A An extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
12 June 2019
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
12 June 2019
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Court of Appeal decision
High Court / District Court judgment
Not publicly available
Case name
The Queen v Maurice William Reti and Logan Aaron Wood
Case number
SC 23/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Reti v R [2019] NZCA 17).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the evidence obtained pursuant to the production order of 4 August 2016 and pursuant to the execution of the search warrant on 1 November 2016 was inadmissible at the trial.
C 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 trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
4 April 2019
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B We make an 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 trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
5 March 2020
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the evidence obtained pursuant to the production order of 4 August 2016 and pursuant to the execution of the search warrant on 1 November 2016 was inadmissible at the trial.
C 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 trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
4 April 2019
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B We make an 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 trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
5 March 2020
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
R v MAURICE WILLIAM RETI [2019] NZSC 36 [4 April 2019] (PDF, 182 KB)
Substantive judgment
Date of hearing
23 July 2019
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Case name
FTG Securities Limited v Bank of New Zealand, Stephen John Tubbs, Colin Anthony Gower and Robert Bruce Walker
Case number
SC 27/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether a prohibition on assignment of a deed of priority and subordination without the consent of the other party is enforceable – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to make declarations as to the interpretation of the deed of priority and subordination.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $4,500 to the respondents (to be shared equally between the first and third respondents unless they agree otherwise) plus usual disbursements.
26 August 2019
B The applicant must pay costs of $4,500 to the respondents (to be shared equally between the first and third respondents unless they agree otherwise) plus usual disbursements.
26 August 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Transcript
Winkelmann CJ, O'Regan and Williams JJ
Case name
Eugene John De Marco v The Queen
Case number
SC 28/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring a pre-trial appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B 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 trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
3 May 2019
B 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 trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
3 May 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
EUGENE JOHN DE MARCO v R [2019] NZSC 43 [3 May 2019] (PDF, 38 KB)
Case name
New Zealand Law Society v John Llewellyn Stanley
Case number
SC 41/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining whether the Applicant was a fit and proper person to be admitted as a barrister and solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand, particularly in relation to the Applicant’s prior convictions.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Stanley v The New Zealand Law Society [2019] NZCA 119).
B The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal against the High Court judgment (Stanley v New Zealand Law Society [2018] NZHC 1154) and to make an order for Mr Stanley’s admission.
13 November 2019
___________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
17 August 2020
B The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal against the High Court judgment (Stanley v New Zealand Law Society [2018] NZHC 1154) and to make an order for Mr Stanley’s admission.
13 November 2019
___________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
17 August 2020
Transcripts
- Hearing date 25 September 2019 (PDF, 172 KB)
- Hearing date 23 April 2020 (PDF, 336 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 83 (PDF, 132 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
[2020] NZSC 83 (PDF, 550 KB)
Page 34 of 51