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
Richard John Creser v Janine Michelle Creser and Marion Ngaire Creser (as Trustees and Executors of the estate of Jesse Joy Creser)
Case number
SC 105/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to accept the applicant’s documents for filing. [2015] NZCA 416 CA 105/2015
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
18 December 2015
___
The recall application is dismissed.
10 February 2016
__
The application for the recall of the judgment of 10 February 2016 is dismissed.
14 March 2016 (direction)
___
A The recall application is dismissed.
B We direct the Registrar to refuse to accept any applications involving challenges to:
(1) the judgment of Harrison J in Creser v Creser [2015] NZCA 416; (
2) our decisions of 18 December 2015, 10 February 2016 and 10 March 2016;
(3) this judgment; and
(4) any future decision of the Registrar refusing to accept such applications.
6 April 2016
18 December 2015
___
The recall application is dismissed.
10 February 2016
__
The application for the recall of the judgment of 10 February 2016 is dismissed.
14 March 2016 (direction)
___
A The recall application is dismissed.
B We direct the Registrar to refuse to accept any applications involving challenges to:
(1) the judgment of Harrison J in Creser v Creser [2015] NZCA 416; (
2) our decisions of 18 December 2015, 10 February 2016 and 10 March 2016;
(3) this judgment; and
(4) any future decision of the Registrar refusing to accept such applications.
6 April 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Recall judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Friedrich Joachim Fehling v Douglas John Appleby
Case number
SC 110/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Appeal against decision of the High Court – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, ss 6, 27 – Human Rights Act 1993, ss 65, 66, 105 – Whether High Court erred in its interpretation of the Bill of Rights Act and Human Rights Act.[2015] NZHC 75 CIV 2014 418 21
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
23 November 2015
23 November 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Human Rights Review Tribunal decision
Case name
Michael John Penman v The Queen
Case number
SC 117/2015
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether there was a breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, ss 25 and 27 – Whether defence counsel failed to adequately follow instructions. [2015] NZCA 364 CA 253/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
28 July 2016
28 July 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MICHAEL JOHN PENMAN v R [2016] NZSC 96 28 July 2016 (PDF, 78 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Christopher Roger King v The Queen
Case number
SC 123/2015
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing Act 2002 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by declining to allow a sentence discount for the applicant’ s previous good character.[2015] NZCA 475 CA 19/2015
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 18 February 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Yoon Lee v District Court at Auckland; Zhi Hong Gao and Lin Ge; John Carter and Brent O’Callaghan and The Official Assignee
Case number
SC 127/2015
Summary
Civil appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to find that the High Court was entitled to make an award of indemnity costs against the applicant – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to find that the applicant’s appeal seeking a stay of enforcement was moot, the debts at issue having been discharged.[2015] NZCA 498 CA 262/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. The applicant must pay each of the second and third respondents costs of $2,500. 17 February 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Simon John Moffatt Hampton v Canterbury Regional Council (Environment Canterbury)
Case number
SC 128/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Resource Management Act 1991 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their approach to the priority of resource consent applications – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that there had been no derogation of the applicant’s rights – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the applicant had no legitimate expectation that a resource consent would be granted.[2015] NZCA 509 CA 745/2013
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent
3 May 2016
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent
3 May 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Thomas Frederick Mazlin King and Judith Ruth King v PFL Finance Limited and Craig Becroft
Case number
SC 130/2015
Summary
Civil appeal – Receivership – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s 18 of the Receivership Act 1993 and s 121 of the Property Law Act 2007 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its findings on causation of loss – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of compellability under the hearsay provisions of the Evidence Act 2006 – Whether there was oppressive enforcement of a credit contract under the Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003.[2015] NZCA 517 CA 74/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. If the applicants are not legally aided, costs of $2,500 are payable to the respondents. If the applicants are legally aided, we make an order under s 45(5) of the Legal Services Act 2011 that, had the applicants not been legally aided, they would have been liable for costs of $2,500. 17 February 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Galvanising (HB ) Limited and others v John Howard Ross Fisk and Tony Wayne Pattison as liquidators of East Quip Limited (in liquidation)
Case number
SC 132/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993, s 292 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 292(4B) of the Companies Act.[2015] NZCA 529 CA 69/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
B The applicants must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents
3 May 2016
B The applicants must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents
3 May 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Case name
Matthew John Young v The District Court at Hamilton
Case number
SC 137/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to give name suppression to the applicant. [2015] NZCA 584 CA 643/2015
Result
The application for interim order suppressing publication of the applicant’s name is dismissed.
16 December 2015
____________________
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 May 2017
16 December 2015
____________________
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 May 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Supreme court decision
Case name
Richard John Creser v Janine Michelle Creser and others
Case number
SC 139/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal decision was tainted by bias or predetermination.[2015] NZCA 579 CA 193/2003
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
13 April 2016
B There is no order for costs.
13 April 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 40 of 51