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
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
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
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Substantive judgment / Media release
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
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
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
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
29 June 2006
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
11 December 2007
Media Releases
- mediarelease owen (PDF, 87 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
OWEN V R SC 25/2007 [11 December 2007] (PDF, 57 KB)
Transcript
Substantive judgment / Media release
Judgment appealed from
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
Page 49 of 51