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
Matthew John Birchler v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 116/2009
Summary
Criminal – appeal directly from the High Court under s 144A(1)(a) of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – intended appeal against the determination of the High Court by way of case stated under s 107 of the Summary Proceedings Act – whether direct appeal to the Supreme Court appropriate given that the Court of Appeal has previously refused leave to appeal on this point on the basis that there were no grounds for challenge to the well established interpretation of s 108 of the Summary Proceedings Act in Davis v Mingins (HC, Rot, AP 48/91, 30/10/91, Fisher J). CRI 2009 485 83 25 November 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 March 2010
_____________________________
Appeal allowed. Order made in the High Court remitting the matter for consideration in the District Court is quashed.
Reasons to be given later.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
Johnathan Brian Irvine and others v John Douglas Wilson and others
Case number
SC 117/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – trusts and trustees – whether second and third appellants, when signing as trustees, can be personally liable under the Trust Deed – whether there was a breach of the Shareholders Agreement due to the failure to get Special Resolutions for significant borrowings and costs as required by the Business Plan specified in the Shareholders Agreement – whether there was a breach of the major transaction requirements of the Companies Act 1993 – additionally, estoppel argument raised for the first time in the Court of Appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to provide the appellants the opportunity to consider or provide evidence in opposition to this point.[2009] NZCA 569 CA 232/2009 7 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to respondents.
18 March 2010
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Douglas John Williamson and John Blackwood Williamson v Selwyn District Council
Case number
SC 118/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – security for costs – strike-out – summary judgment – Appeal against strike-out by Court of Appeal – appellants’ failure to pay security for costs – Appeal against application in High Court by Selwyn District Council (SDC) to recover possession of land – Appellants refused to vacate land on expiry of 3-year lease agreement as part of sale and purchase agreement of land to SDC – Whether sale and purchase agreement and lease void because SDC exerted duress/undue influence or obtained unconscionable bargain in abuse of dominant bargaining position, or acted in breach of Local Government Act 1974 – Whether the SDC breached Resource Management Act 1991 in obtaining non-notified resource consent – Whether lawyers acted in conflict of interest between appellants and SDC councillor and breached fiduciary duty – Whether appellants waived conflict of interest with informed consent.[2008] NZCA 147 CA 662/2007 5 June 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 23 February 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Supreme court decision
Judgment appealed from
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
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [25 July 2008] (PDF, 48 KB)
Transcript
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
- media release gordon smith (PDF, 87 KB)
Substantive judgment
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [23 March 2009] (PDF, 108 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [25 July 2008] (PDF, 48 KB)
Dates
25 July 2008 – Application for leave to appeal granted.
______________________
Appeal dismissed.
23 March 2009
Transcription
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
BELCHER v R SC 34/2008 [27 March 2009] (PDF, 16 KB)
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
CASEY v R SC 66/2008 [5 December 2008] (PDF, 16 KB)
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
Media Releases
- sc 67 2008 westpac v alan john clark press release (PDF, 88 KB)
Substantive judgment
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is granted.
27 November 2008
Transcript
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
MIKITASOV v COLLINS SC 76/2008 [4 February 2009] (PDF, 18 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
4 February 2009
Page 48 of 51