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
John Bevan-Smith v Raupo Publishing (NZ) Limited
Case number
SC 2/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – breach of contract – book publication - whether Court of Appeal should have granted extension of time to file case on appeal – whether agreement between applicant and defendant void because of deceptive conduct – whether the defendant breached due diligence obligations in contract - whether the Court received misleading evidence regarding the motive’ s of the defendant – whether High Court made correct findings of fact especially regarding timing of events – whether the Court of Appeal should have reconsidered findings of fact made by the High Court – whether High Court correctly interpreted relevant clauses in contract –whether quantum of lost book sales correctly calculated – whether case should be remitted to the Court of Appeal to be reheard or to the High Court for a new trial.[2007] NZCA 579 CA 57/07 14 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $1,500 to the respondent.

9 April 2008

Case name
Shaun Antony King v The Queen
Case number
SC 18/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal by way of case stated – Juries Act 1981 – applicant challenges the legality and fairness of jury-vetting, under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Privacy Act 1993 and the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 – whether controls should operate over prosecution use of information including, but not limited to, the criminal history of a potential jury member – whether disclosure by the prosecution to the defence should be required in relation to such information.[2008] NZCA 79 CA 207/2007 10 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Deborah Gordon-Smith v The Queen
Case number
SC 32/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal by way of case stated – Juries Act 1981 – Challenge under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, Privacy Act 1993 and Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 to legality and fairness of jury-vetting by Police so as to provide Prosecutor with information including, but not limited to, non-disqualifying criminal histories of persons on jury list – Jurisdiction – Leave on same grounds as King v R (SC 18/2008) sought – Jurisdiction issue relevant to King case sole reason for application for leave and to be included as a party to King case.[2008] NZCA 79 CA 207/2007 10 April 2008
Media Releases
Substantive judgment
Leave judgment - leave granted
Dates

25 July 2008 – Application for leave to appeal granted.

______________________

Appeal dismissed.

23 March 2009

Transcription

Hearing date : 10 July 2008

Hearing date : 3 December 2008 

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Wilson JJ.

Case name
Jonathan John Edward Belcher v The Queen
Case number
SC 34/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – indecent assault and sexual violation – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to find that the trial Judge did not need to dismiss the jury when the appellant alleged he knew a juror – whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that there was evidence to convict.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

27 March 2009

Case name
Kevin Francis John Casey v The Queen
Case number
SC 66/2008
Summary
Criminal Appeal – pre-trial application – drink driving – admissibility of evidential breath test printout – whether there was a lawful roadside detention – whether the Court of Appeal correctly interpreted s 114 of the Land Transport Act 1998 – claim proper breath screening procedure was not adopted – whether s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006 should have been applied to this claim – whether the right to consult a lawyer under s 23(1)(b) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act was complied with[2008] NZCA 335  CA 246/2008  1 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.            

5 December 2008

Case name
Westpac New Zealand Limited v Alan John Clark
Case number
SC 67/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Property – Mortgages – Security – Fraud – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding, in effect, that Appellant’ s mortgage secured nothing – Whether Court of Appeal erred in rejecting Appellant’s submission that upon registration of a mortgage, charged property is rendered liable for the mortgage debt (monies advanced in terms of or in reliance upon the mortgage or monies secured by the mortgage) whatever the mortgage debt is established to be by the lender – Whether Court of Appeal erred in rejecting Appellant’s submission that for purposes of determining what monies are secured by a mortgage, there is no difference between an acknowledgment contained in a mortgage of a particular sum lent with a covenant to repay that sum and an acknowledgment of an unparticularised sum (“all monies”) with a covenant to repay those monies – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that a personal covenant to pay contained in a mortgage is independent of the charged created by the mortgage and does not attract indefeasibility on registration – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that the terms of the loan agreement between the Appellant and a fraudster were not incorporated into the registered mortgage – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding Appellant suffered no loss as a result of the Respondent’s breach of undertaking to register the Appellant’ s mortgage “promptly”.[2008] NZCA 346  CA 172/06    5 September 2008
Dates

Application for leave to appeal is granted.

27 November 2008

Case name
Igor Alexandrovich Mikitasov v Bernard John Collins
Case number
SC 76/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – extent of right of way for driveway to adjacent properties – whether respondent’s representations prior to the sale of 2 adjacent properties to the appellant included a representation that the right of way granted to one Lot could be used for access to the other– whether Court of Appeal had sufficient information to conclude that the respondent did not make such a representation – whether the uses of the two Lots owned by the appellant, the circumstances of their purchase and the convenience provided by the use of the right of way for both lots are sufficient to support a counterclaim for an interest in land – whether the principle in Wheeldon v Burrows (1879) 12 Ch D 31 of being ‘necessary for reasonable enjoyment’ applies– whether an injunction should have been granted in addition to a declaration – whether the respondent is estopped from strictly enforcing the terms of the right of way.[2008] NZCA 390   CA 211/2008    25 September  2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

4 February 2009

Case name
John Donald Currie v The Queen
Case number
SC 7/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act.CA 473/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. Application for leave to cross appeal dismissed.
29 May 2007
_________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
In Supreme Court, reasonable expenses as may be fixed by the Registrar.
14 November 2007
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
Kurt John Owen v The Queen
Case number
SC 25/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – whether discretion to consider appeals on the basis of unreasonable verdicts has been unduly restricted – complaint about the adequacy of summing up by trial judge – emotive summing up by prosecution – direction by trial judge concerning prosecution’s comment on the right to silence – trial judge’ s use of the transcript – whether Court of Appeal was correct to hold that overall there was no miscarriage of justice.CA 342/06 21 March 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
29 June 2006
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
11 December 2007
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Substantive judgment / Media release