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.
17 August 2026
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 128 KB)
All years
Case name
RL and WL v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development and others.
Case number
SC 77/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Special Application to bypass Court of Appeal – Actual or apparent bias – Muir test – Whether High Court erred by failing to take into account international conventions – Whether Court acted unreasonably and failed to properly exercise its discretion.Civ 2007 404 7031 High Court Auckland 13 October 2008.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Application for stay of judgment dimissed.
24 November 2008
Case name
Diagnostic Medlab Limited v Auckland District Health Board and others
Case number
SC 80/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – judicial review – the Auckland region District Health Boards (ARDHBs) put out to tender the provision of its community laboratory services – the successful tenderer was Lab Tests Auckland Limited (Lab Tests) and the incumbent provider, Diagnostic Medlab Limited (DML), applied to the High Court for judicial review of the ARDHBs’ decision on the basis that the decision was procedurally flawed – the application was successful in the High Court and but an appeal to the Court of Appeal by Lab Tests was allowed – whether the Court of Appeal failed to interpret the provisions of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000 (PHDA) as contemplating and requiring supplementing by principles of natural justice – whether the Court of Appeal applied a wrong and unduly restrictive approach to judicial review in the context of a contracting decision for an essential public health service – whether the Court of Appeal sanctioned a result which undermined the principles of natural justice, compromised the integrity of the relevant contracting process, and eroded public trust and confidence in decision-making by DHBs generally – whether the Court of Appeal failed to recognise that the PHDA contemplates a significant community voice in decisions affecting public health, including by way of meaningful consultation in accordance with expectations established by documents required by the PHDA – whether the Court of Appeal failed to apply any or an appropriate level of scrutiny to the DHBs’ decision on the grounds of unreasonableness – whether the Court of Appeal failed to pay any or proper respect to the High Court’s identification and evaluation of the relevant factual context, and that Court’s advantages as a primary fact-finder and adjudicator of mixed questions of law and fact. [2008] NZCA 385 CA 154/07 25 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Costs $2,5000 to the first respondents (jointly) and $2,500 to the second respondent.
Case name
Alan Ivo Greer v The Parole Board at Auckland Prison and others
Case number
SC 9/2007
Summary
Civil Appeal – Appeal against decision to refuse writ of habeas corpus – whether there was misconduct by public officials – whether the Court of Appeal erred in accepting and acting on contested evidence.CA 271/06 21 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 7 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Waitara Leaseholders Association Inc v New Plymouth District Council
Case number
SC 23/2007
Summary
Civil –Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that land was not held on a charitable trust and that the Council was not subject to the obligations of charitable trustees – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the Council was not obliged to consider the objects of the statutory trusts when deciding to seek legislation to remove trust restrictions – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that compliance with section 14(6) of the Trustee Act 1956 relieves a trustee from its obligation of obtaining the best price for an asset – whether the Supreme Court should grant leave to pursue a new ground, namely that the Council failed to take into account the fact that its decisions were contrary to previous promises and assurances that it had made.CA 259/05 CA 260/05 20 March 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs $2,500 to the respondent.
20 June 2007
20 June 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Deo Datt Sharma v Nirmala Wati
Case number
SC 29/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – application for removal of counsel for child – whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing leave to appeal under s 145(1)(b) Care of Children Act 2004 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that there was no right of appeal under s 66 Judicature Act 1908 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its award of costs – additional application for temporary stay of access proceedings in Auckland High Court CA 98/07 2 May 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
23 July 2007
23 July 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SHARMA v NIRMALA WATI SC 29/2007 [23 July 2007] (PDF, 14 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Harvey Douglas White v Auckland District Health Board
Case number
SC 37/2007
Summary
Civil Appeal – leap frog appeal against decision of the Employment Court after the Court of Appeal declined leave to appeal - whether the Employment Court erred in law when it declined to grant a permanent non-publication order in relation to the applicant’s name – whether the Court considered matters for which there was no evidential basis and failed to consider relevant matters – whether the Court erred when it concluded that the applicant had brought the public consequences upon himself – whether the Court failed to ensure that it had up to date information AC 10/7 ARC 52/05 23 February 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Order preventing publication of the applicants name is lifted. Costs to respondent $2,5000 plus disbursements.
8 August 2007
8 August 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Tumu Te Heuheu v Attorney – General and others
Case number
SC 49/2007
Summary
Civil – Treaty of Waitangi – Crown Forest Assets Act 1989 – Te Pumautanga o Te Arawa Settlement Deed, Part 12 – Settlement Deed aimed to settle historical breaches of Treaty in respect of 11 iwi or hapu affiliated with Te Arawa – Settlement Deed would be made unconditional by proposed legislation – Applicants sought declaration that Settlement Deed was in breach of Crown Forest Assets Act 1989, the agreements predating that Act, and the Crown’s fiduciary duties under the Treaty – High Court and Court of Appeal dismissed the claims. Whether the issues are justiciable – whether the agreement predating the 1989 Act (“the July 1989 Agreement” ) was a political compact and therefore unenforceable – whether Crown conduct is or was inconsistent with the July 1989 Agreement – the nature of the Crown’s fiduciary duty to Mäori under the Treaty and the July 1989 Agreement. CA 241/07; CA 247/07 2 July 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
8 November 2007
______________________
Appeal withdrawn. No orders as to costs.
4 November 2008
Judgment appealed from
Case name
NZ Maori Council and The Federation of Maori Authorities Inc v Attorney-General and others
Case number
SC 50/2007
Summary
Civil – Treaty of Waitangi – Crown Forest Assets Act 1989 – Te Pumautanga o Te Arawa Settlement Deed, Part 12 – Settlement Deed aimed to settle historical breaches of Treaty in respect of 11 iwi or hapu affiliated with Te Arawa – Settlement Deed would be made unconditional by proposed legislation – Applicants sought declaration that Settlement Deed was in breach of Crown Forest Assets Act 1989, the agreements predating that Act, and the Crown’s fiduciary duties under the Treaty – High Court and Court of Appeal dismissed the claims. Whether the issues are justiciable – whether the agreement predating the 1989 Act (“the July 1989 Agreement” ) was a political compact and therefore unenforceable – whether Crown conduct is or was inconsistent with the July 1989 Agreement – the nature of the Crown’s fiduciary duty to Mäori under the Treaty and the July 1989 Agreement. CA 241/07; CA 247/07 2 July 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Grant to intervene
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
8 November 2007
__________________
Appeal withdrawn. No orders as to costs.
4 November 2008
Case name
Gisborne District Council v Port Gisborne Limited (now known as Tauwhareparae Farms Ltd) and Ors
Case number
SC 63/2007
Summary
Civil – strike-out – whether lower Courts erred in refusing to strike out cause of action in negligence – respondent company seeking contribution from applicant Council in proceedings against them arising from the Jody F Millennium grounding – whether Court of Appeal conflated negligence and statutory duty causes of action – whether there can be a duty of care to protect someone from loss arising from his or her legal liability for negligence – whether respondent entitled in these circumstances to claim that applicant owed parallel duties of care to other parties including the ship – whether Court of Appeal erred in awarding full costs against the applicant. CA 118/06 10 August 2007
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed.
19 January 2008
Case name
Geoffrey Charles Dury and others v Palmerston North City Council and others
Case number
SC 91/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – Resource Management Act 1991 – application by third respondent (an orthodontist) for consent to use a dwelling in a residential area for a non-residential purpose – proposal failed to comply with conditions of District Plan and required a restricted discretionary resource consent, which Council granted without requiring notification – High Court quashed Council’s consent – Court of Appeal overturned High Court decision and restored resource consent – in the meantime, third respondent had applied for and been granted a second resource consent, subject to more restrictive conditions than the first – whether second consent replaced first consent in toto in accordance with Sutton v Moule (1992) 2 NZRMA 41 – whether third respondent may be deemed to have abandoned first consent by making and proceeding with second application and complying with its conditions – alternatively, whether the two consents coexist and third respondent must comply with the conditions of both – whether the consent that is later in time should prevail – whether the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that it had no discretion as to the available remedy – whether the Court of Appeal correctly applied the principles of the Discount Brands case ([2005] 2 NZLR 597) in relation to dispensing with public notification – application for stay of execution of Court of Appeal’s costs orders.[2007] NZCA 521 CA 198/06 CA 211/06 20 November 2007
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $1,000 to the first respondent and $1,000 jointly to the second and third respondents.
1 April 2008
1 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 18 of 20