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
Ben Nevis Forestry Ventures Limited, Bristol Forestry Ventures Limited, Clive Richard Bradbury, Greenmass Limited, Gregory Alan Peebles and Estate of the Late Kenneth John Laird v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 43/2007
Summary
Civil – income tax appeals – designated as test cases by Commissioner – all appellants investors in “Trinity” forestry scheme – whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding Commissioner’s assessments – correct approach to application of Peterson v CIR [2006] 3 NZLR 433 – whether appellants’ investment in scheme a tax avoidance arrangement within meaning of ss BB 9 and BG 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 – whether insurance premiums required to be spread under accruals rules – whether Commissioner’s power to reconstruct arrangements to eliminate improper tax advantage exercised correctly – whether appellants took an abusive tax position – whether application of penalties to the appellants wrong in law and excessive.CA 21/05 11 June 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
9 October 2007
____________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondent.
19 December 2008
9 October 2007
____________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondent.
19 December 2008
Media Releases
- MR [2008] NZSC 115 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Recall judgment
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Hearing date : 8 February 2008
Hearing date : 23 – 27 June 2008
Elias CJ, Tipping, McGrath Gault, Anderson JJ
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Saxmere Company Limited, The Escorial Company Limited, Richard King, Russell Stewart Emmerson and Forest Ramge Limited v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Limited
Case number
SC 64/2007
Summary
Civil – applicants challenged the Wool Board’s decisions allocating funding for wool marketing, seeking judicial review and restitution of levies paid and alleging breach of statutory duty (s 6(6) Wool Act 1997) and negligence – High Court Judge found the Board liable in damages for breach of statutory duty and negligence, in relation to one of their four decisions – Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by the respondent and dismissed a cross-appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its analysis of the Board’ s decisions under s 6(6) of the Act – whether the Court of Appeal took proper account of the context and purpose of the Wool Act – whether the Court of Appeal failed to address the existence of a duty of care independent of s 6(6) – whether the Court of Appeal erred by making material factual findings which differed from the trial Judge and which were contrary to the evidence heard by the trial Judge – whether the High Court Judge erred in limiting his damages to only one of the four decisions, and in denying restitution of levies.CA 222/05 [2007] NZCA 349 15 August 2007 CIV 485 – 2003 – 2724 6 December 2005
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
12 November 2007
_________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements.
3 July 2009
__________________________
The judgment of this Court delivered on 3 July 2009 ([2009] NZSC 72) is recalled and the orders made in that judgment are set aside. The appeal is allowed and the proceeding remitted for rehearing in the Court of Appeal. Costs are reserved. Counsel should make written submissions directed to how costs should be borne for the previous hearing in the Court of Appeal and the two hearings in this Court.
27 November 2009
12 November 2007
_________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements.
3 July 2009
__________________________
The judgment of this Court delivered on 3 July 2009 ([2009] NZSC 72) is recalled and the orders made in that judgment are set aside. The appeal is allowed and the proceeding remitted for rehearing in the Court of Appeal. Costs are reserved. Counsel should make written submissions directed to how costs should be borne for the previous hearing in the Court of Appeal and the two hearings in this Court.
27 November 2009
Media Releases
- saxmere v wool board press release 3 july 2009 (PDF, 89 KB)
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Substantive judgment / Media release
Special leave judgment
Case name
Alan John Shirley v Wairarapa District Health Board
Case number
SC 10/2006
Summary
Civil - costs - defendant in negligence proceedings persuaded plaintiff to join second defendant - plaintiff discontinued proceedings against first defendant after accepting settlement offer - second defendant successfully defended claim in full hearing - whether second defendant entitled to costs against first defendant. CA 43/05 7 December 2005
Result
Leave to Appeal granted.
21 March 2006
_______________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 plus disbursements.
23 August 2006
21 March 2006
_______________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 plus disbursements.
23 August 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
David John Young v The Queen
Case number
SC 21/2006
Summary
Criminal appeal - conviction under s 45(1) of the Arms Act 1983 for possession of an airgun except for some lawful, proper, and sufficient purpose - Court of Appeal dismissed appeal against conviction - whether Court of Appeal erred in interpretation and application of ss 42 and 48 of the Crimes Act 1961 - whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpretation and application of ss 4 and 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 - whether the Court of Appeal failed to address a ground of appeal. CA 266/05 8 March 2005CA
Result
Leave to Appeal dismissed.
6 June 2006
6 June 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
YOUNG V R SC 21/2006 [6 June 2006] (PDF, 16 KB)
Case name
John Wharemako Gillies v The Queen
Case number
SC 35/2006
Summary
Criminal – defendant convicted for possession of drugs for supply – whether Court of Appeal erred in refusing to consider whether trial judge had misdirected jury – whether trial judge obliged to direct jury to consider a defence reasonably open to it but disavowed by the defendant. CA 252/05 28 March 2006
Result
Appeal dismissed.
20 July 2006
20 July 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
GILLIES V R SC 35/2006 [20 July 2006] (PDF, 16 KB)
Case name
Michael John Jones v The Queen
Case number
SC 65/2006
Summary
Criminal – defendant pleaded guilty on arraignment to counts of assault with a weapon and threatening to kill – whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing appeal against conviction on the ground of undue delay. CA 27/06 25 July 2006
Result
10 October 2006
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Brent John Gilchrist v The Queen
Case number
SC 69/2006
Summary
Criminal – Tax Administration Act – tax evasion – applicant convicted of knowingly failing to provide Commissioner of Inland Revenue with information when required to do so pursuant to a notice to furnish information – standard of proof of delegation of authority from Commissioner – standard of intent to evade payment of tax.CA 29/06 18 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
29 September 2006
________________
Appeal dismissed.
15 December 2006
Transcript
Substantive judgment / Media release
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Christopher John Manawatu v The Queen
Case number
SC 92/2006
Summary
Criminal – applicant convicted of aggravated robbery and driving while disqualified – applicant convicted in separate proceeding of three counts of manslaughter, and one charge each of reckless driving and excess blood alcohol – no appeal against conviction or sentence – whether s 398 Crimes Act infringes ss 14, 25(a) and 25(h) New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 or Articles 14(1), 19(2) and 26 of ICCPR – whether s 398 discriminates against criminal appellants, there being no equivalent provision applying to civil cases – whether Court of Appeal should have disclosed to counsel prior to the hearing that s 398(1) is in the process of being repealed - whether Court of Appeal should have made Declaration of Inconsistency of s 398 with BORA - whether undue appellate delay – whether there should be a reduction in sentence by reason of appellate delay. CA 111/05 CA 112/05 10 November 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
8 March 2007
8 March 2007
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
John Anthony Reid v The Queen
Case number
SC 95/2006
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 474/06 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. 29 May 2007 ____________ Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together ith reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenses. 14 November 2007
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together ith reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenses. 14 November 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Hearing
10 and 11 October 2007_note SC3/2007
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Bernard John Pavitt v The Queen
Case number
SC 7/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal against conviction for aggravated robbery - whether colour of right - whether evidence inadmissable as unfairly obtained - burden of proof - whether misdirection by trial judge in telling jury that two others involved in the offending had also been charged. CA 257/04 21 October 2004
Result
Leave to appeal refused.
10 May 2005
10 May 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
PAVITT V R SC 7/2005 [10 May 2005] (PDF, 15 KB)
Page 48 of 50