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
WK v Refugee Protection Officer
Case number
SC 62/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against the High Court’s dismissal of judicial review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its dismissal of the application to adduce further evidence.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
10 October 2018
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
10 October 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Douglas Craig Schmuck v Opua Coastal Preservation Incorporated and Far North District Council
Case number
SC 66/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to the interpretation of the scope of easements – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by not relying on resource consents when examining the easements at issue – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not considering the question of indefeasibility.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Opua Coastal Preservation Incorporated v Far North District Council [2018] NZCA 262).
B The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal.
21 February 2019
________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The decision of the second respondent as delegate of the Minister of Conservation to consent to the challenged easements referred to at [32] of the Reasons of the Court is reinstated.
C Costs are reserved.
D Leave is reserved to the parties to apply for consequential orders if required.
29 October 2019
B The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal.
21 February 2019
________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The decision of the second respondent as delegate of the Minister of Conservation to consent to the challenged easements referred to at [32] of the Reasons of the Court is reinstated.
C Costs are reserved.
D Leave is reserved to the parties to apply for consequential orders if required.
29 October 2019
Transcripts
- Hearing date 9 - 10 July 2019 (PDF, 589 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2019] NZSC 118 (PDF, 71 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
Dermont Gregory Nottingham v Auckland District Court, Hemi Taka, Martin Honey and Stephanie Honey
Case number
SC 73/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Criminal Procedure Act 2011 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the appeal against the decisions of the High Court.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay the respondents costs of $2,500. 5 November 2018
B The applicant is to pay the respondents costs of $2,500. 5 November 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Dermont Gregory Nottingham v District Court at Auckland, Martin Russell Honey, Stephanie Frances Honey and Hemi Taka
Case number
SC 76/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the striking out of his claim.
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is dismissed. B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondents. 20 November 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Marie Deanne Castle v Whakatane District Council
Case number
SC 81/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether there are exceptional circumstances which warrant granting leave against a decision of the High Court dismissing an application for a declaration that rates assessed against properties owned by the applicant are invalid.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
30 October 2018
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
30 October 2018
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
B v ALA
Case number
SC 18/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Employment Court erred in its application of confidentiality provisions in a settlement agreement.
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted but the application for leave is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs to the respondent of $2,500. 26 April 2017
B The applicant must pay costs to the respondent of $2,500. 26 April 2017
Employment Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Southland Indoor Leisure Centre Charitable Trust v Invercargill City Council
Case number
SC 37/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that no duty of care was owed by the Invercargill City Council to the Southland Indoor Leisure Centre Charitable Trust – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of limitation and contributory negligence principles
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Invercargill City Council v Southland Indoor Leisure Centre Charitable Trust
[2017] NZCA 68).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to reverse the judgment of Dunningham J.
30 May 2017
__________________________
A The appeal is allowed in part.
B The finding made in the High Court upholding the appellant’s claim against the respondent is restored. The finding of the Court of Appeal that the appellant was contributorily negligent and that an award of damages should be reduced by 50 per cent is upheld. Judgment is entered accordingly. Leave is reserved to the parties to apply if any issues arise about the calculation of the judgment sum (including interest).
C The respondent must pay the appellant costs of $15,000 and reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary. We allow for second counsel.
D The costs awards made in the Court of Appeal and in the High Court are set aside. If costs in those Courts cannot be agreed they should be set by the Court of Appeal and the High Court respectively in light of this judgment.
14 December 2017
[2017] NZCA 68).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to reverse the judgment of Dunningham J.
30 May 2017
__________________________
A The appeal is allowed in part.
B The finding made in the High Court upholding the appellant’s claim against the respondent is restored. The finding of the Court of Appeal that the appellant was contributorily negligent and that an award of damages should be reduced by 50 per cent is upheld. Judgment is entered accordingly. Leave is reserved to the parties to apply if any issues arise about the calculation of the judgment sum (including interest).
C The respondent must pay the appellant costs of $15,000 and reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary. We allow for second counsel.
D The costs awards made in the Court of Appeal and in the High Court are set aside. If costs in those Courts cannot be agreed they should be set by the Court of Appeal and the High Court respectively in light of this judgment.
14 December 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 10 - 11 August 2017 (PDF, 853 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2017] NZSC 190 (PDF, 280 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Da (David) Jiang Fan v The Queen
Case number
SC 107/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of the City of Auckland Operative District Plan 1999 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 6 December 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
DA JIANG FAN v R [2017] NZSC 184 [6 December 2017] (PDF, 86 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
George Charlie Baker v The Queen
Case number
SC 109/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentence Appeal – Whether the High Court erred in imposing a minimum term of preventive detention longer than the maximum period of imprisonment for the offending.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
19 December 2017
19 December 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Karl Teangiotau Nuku v The District Court at Auckland and The Attorney General
Case number
SC 117/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Crimes Act 1961, s 347 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against a failed application for judicial review of the trial Judge’s decision not to discharge the applicant under s 347.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
8 February 2018
___________________________
The recall application is dismissed.
4 May 2018
8 February 2018
___________________________
The recall application is dismissed.
4 May 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Page 10 of 20