Supreme Court case information

Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
5 May 2026

Criminal Appeal

A The application for leave to appeal by H is granted ([H] v R [2023] NZCA 633).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals in both CA169/2023 and CA170/2023.
C We make an interim order continuing suppression of the applicant’s name, address, occupation and identifying particulars pending further order of this Court.
15 April 2024
_____________________________________________________________

A The appeal against conviction is allowed and a discharge without conviction is substituted.
B We make an order prohibiting publication of the name, address, occupation and identifying particulars of the appellant.                                                  
10 June 2025

Civil Appeal

A The applications for extensions of time to apply for leave to appeal are granted.
B Leave to appeal is granted (J v Attorney-General [2023] NZCA 660).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals.
18 April 2024
__________________________________________________

A The appeal is allowed in part.  The approach of the Court of Appeal to s 85 of the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003 was incorrect.  The Family Court, in considering this matter in the context of a review under Part 6 of the Act, is to address J’s condition and status in accordance with our approach to s 85.    

B The further evidence described below at [156] is admitted.  

C The application for recall of this Court’s leave judgment of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, T v Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is allowed only to clarify the matters which are properly before the Court.

D The judgment of this Court of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, Tv Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is reissued accordingly.

E Costs are reserved.                                                                                                                        

15 August 2025

Civil Appeal

A The applications for extensions of time to apply for leave to appeal are granted.
B Leave to appeal is granted (J v Attorney-General [2023] NZCA 660).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals.
18 April 2024
_______________________________________

A The appeal is allowed in part.  The approach of the Court of Appeal to s 85 of the Intellectual Disability (Compulsory Care and Rehabilitation) Act 2003 was incorrect.  The Family Court, in considering this matter in the context of a review under Part 6 of the Act, is to address J’s condition and status in accordance with our approach to s 85.    

B The further evidence described below at [156] is admitted.  

C The application for recall of this Court’s leave judgment of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, T v Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is allowed only to clarify the matters which are properly before the Court.

D The judgment of this Court of 18 April 2024 (J, Compulsory Care Recipient, by his Welfare Guardian, Tv Attorney General [2024] NZSC 34) is reissued accordingly.

E Costs are reserved.                                                                                                                         15 August 2025

Civil Appeal

A The applications for leave to appeal and cross-appeal are granted (Whangarei District Council v Daisley [2024] NZCA 161).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to (1) dismiss the appeal against the High Court’s finding that the applicant was liable in negligence; and (2) allow the appeal against the High Court’s finding that the applicant was liable for misfeasance in public office, for which it should pay exemplary damages.
25 September 2024
__________________________________________________________________________

A The appeal is allowed in part. The finding that the appellant fraudulently concealed the respondent’s right of action is set aside.
B The appeal in respect of the award of damages of $90,000 for loss of the value of the Knight Road property, and interest on that sum in the terms set out by the High Court, is dismissed.
C The damages awarded to the respondent are otherwise set aside.
D The cross-appeal is dismissed.
E The respondent must pay the appellant costs of $45,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.     
4 June 2026