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
William Patrick Jeffries v The Privacy Commissioner
Case number
SC 5/2010
Summary
Civil – Litigation privilege – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that unsolicited communication does not attract litigation privilege under s56 of the Evidence Act 2006 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting the word ‘person’ in s91(4) of the Privacy Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to apply s74 of the Evidence Act 2006 to matters before the Privacy Commissioner – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in failing to review the Privacy Commissioner’ s decisions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not addressing s27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.[2009] NZCA 567 CA 339/2008 3 December 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. The approved ground is whether unsolicited communications received by the applicant while acting as a barrister are capable of attracting litigation privilege.
31 March 2010
_______________________
The appeal is dismissed. Any claim of privilege must be referred for the determination of the Privacy Commissioner in accordance with this judgment. No order for costs is made.
12 August 2010
31 March 2010
_______________________
The appeal is dismissed. Any claim of privilege must be referred for the determination of the Privacy Commissioner in accordance with this judgment. No order for costs is made.
12 August 2010
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 22/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal failed to give effect to the criteria for consent to overseas investment as set out in s 14A of the Overseas Investment Act 1973; Whether the “standard conditions” for granting consent imposes a continuing obligation on consent-holders to carry out the proposals they made to the Minister in order to secure such consent; Whether releasing information supplied by the appellant pursuant to s 6(c) of the Official Information Act 1982 would prejudice the maintenance of the law or would breach the appellant’s confidence.[2010] NZCA 38 CA 338/2008 26 February 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Costs $2.500 to the respondent.
26 May 2010.
Case name
Jeremy William Mataira v The Queen
Case number
SC 53/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Assault – Appeal against convictions based on alleged misconduct at trial – Whether Appellant denied ability to mount a credible appeal to Court of Appeal because evidence of alleged misconduct at trial unavailable.[2010] NZCA 190 CA 162/2009 14 May 2010
Dates
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
13 August 2010.
Case name
Bruce Benjamin Shepherd v The Queen
Case number
SC 84/2010
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – applicant was convicted on 20 counts of sexual offending against eight complainants – during re-examination of one complainant the judge intervened to clarify the meaning of an earlier question from counsel for the defence in cross-examination and sought the complainant’s answer – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the questioning did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that particular conduct of the applicant’s counsel at trial did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice .[2010] NZCA 351 CA 105/2009 5 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SHEPHERD v R SC 84/2010 [1 April 2011] (PDF, 10 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
1 April 2011
Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 92/2010
Summary
Civil – Judicial Review – Judicature Amendment Act 1972 – Visiting arrangements for maximum-security prisoner and young daughter – High Court declined appellant interim relief against prison manager’ s decision restricting previous monthly contact visits with daughter in interests of child and prisoner safety – Whether Court of Appeal erred in declining to make mandatory interim relief order against prison manager’s discretion despite finding that courts have jurisdiction to order mandatory interim relief against the Crown – Whether Court of Appeal should have commented on respondent’s cross-appeal when High Court observations founding cross-appeal made only in obiter.[2010] NZCA 371 CA 165/2010 16 August 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
8 December 2010.
Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Queen
Case number
SC 5/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – kidnapping and escaping from lawful custody – appeal against conviction and sentence – whether a plea of previous acquittal was available to the applicant at his trial – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to hold that whether the applicant was in lawful custody was an issue for the judge – whether the sentence was excessive [2008] NZCA 558 CA 61/2008 17 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
15 May 2009
15 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TAYLOR v R SC 5/2009 [15 May 2009] (PDF, 15 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Department of Corrections and another.
Case number
SC 35/2009
Summary
Civil – Disciplinary proceedings - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the decision of the Hearing Adjudicator to refer a charge to a Visiting Justice was not subject to s 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly found the decision of the Hearing Adjudicator did not breach natural justice – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 134 of the Corrections Act 2004 does not require a Hearing Adjudicator to provide notice to a prisoner that his or her charge is being referred to a Visiting Justice, or to allow the prisoner the opportunity to be heard on that referral – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Hearing Adjudicator had not taken into account irrelevant circumstances – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that s 134(2)(a) of the Corrections Act does not exclude consideration of a prisoner’ s past disciplinary record.[2009] NZCA 129 CA 318/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
24 July 2009
24 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 41/2009
Summary
Civil – Judicial Review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that as the Appellant was not a participant in the statutory scheme under review the Appellant did not possess public interest standing to review the identified pleaded decisions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that s 27(1) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 has no application to decision making under the Official Information Act 1982CIV 2006 – 485-2161 20 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused. Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent.
3 June 2009
3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Privacy Commissioner
Case number
SC 42/2009
Summary
Civil – Judicial Review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that a barrister may not invoke the privilege of general immunity against civil liability in respect of his participation in court proceedings against the Privacy Commissioner in relation to the barrister’s preparation and conduct of court proceedings and thereafter – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that a barrister conducting litigation before a court comes within the definition of “agency” in s 2 of the Privacy Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that “any person” in s 91(4) of the Act includes persons who are not “agencies” pursuant to s 2 of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the Privacy Commissioner’s failure to abide her notice obligations under ss 70 and 73 of the Act was understandable and not a relevant consideration in assessing her decision-makingCIV 2006 – 485-860 22 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused. Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent. 3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Benjamin Morland Easton v Broadcasting Commission and Broadcasting Standards Authority
Case number
SC 55/2009
Summary
Civil – Security for costs – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in requiring security for costs before hearing – Whether the Court of Appeal’s requirement for security of costs amounts to an unreasonable barrier to Court access and is discriminatory – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss allegedly “uncontested evidence”[2009] NZCA 252 CA 793/2008 17 June 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Page 20 of 22