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.
19 June 2026
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 89 KB)
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 126 KB)
All years
Case name
Philip William Routhan and Julie Veronica Routhan as Trustees of the Kaniere Family Trust v PGG Wrightson Real Estate Limited
Case number
SC 45/2023
Summary
Civil Appeal and Cross-Appeal
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to cross-appeal is granted.
B Leave to appeal and cross-appeal is granted in part (PGG Wrightson Real Estate Ltd v Routhan [2023] NZCA 123).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct in varying the damages awarded in the High Court.
D The applications for leave to appeal and cross-appeal are otherwise dismissed.
22 September 2023
____________________________________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We fix damages payable by the respondent at $780,500, with interest as specified at [234].
B The cross-appeal is dismissed.
C The respondent must pay the appellants one set of costs of $50,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
26 June 2025
Date of hearing
11 March 2024
- 12 March 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Ellen France, Kós and Miller JJ | Venue: Christchurch High Court Courtroom 12
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing 11 and 12 March 2024 Appellant submissions (PDF, 12 MB)
- Hearing 11 and 12 March 2024 Respondent submissions (PDF, 1.5 MB)
- Hearing 11 and 12 March 2024 Cross Appellant submissions (PDF, 221 KB)
- Hearing 11 and 12 March 2024 Cross Respondent submissions (PDF, 354 KB)
- Hearing 11 and 12 March 2024 Joint Chronology (PDF, 258 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 March 2024 Appellant oral outline (PDF, 934 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 March 2024 Cross Respondent oral outline (PDF, 174 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 March 2024 Respondent oral outline (PDF, 258 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing 11-12 March 2024 (PDF, 1016 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 11 and 12 March 2024 SC 45/2023 (PDF, 450 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2025] NZSC 68 (PDF, 292 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Videos
- SC 45/2023 Philip William Routhan and Julie Veronica Routhan as Trustees of the Kaniere Family Trust v PGG Wrightson Real Estate Ltd (Recorded, 12 March 2024)
- SC 45/2023 Philip William Routhan and Julie Veronica Routhan as Trustees of the Kaniere Family Trust v PGG Wrightson Real Estate Ltd (Recorded, 11 March 2024)
Case name
W (SC 60/2023) v The King
Case number
SC 60/2023
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Mr Hoggart’s application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The applications for leave to appeal are granted in part ([W] v R [2023] NZCA 155). The approved questions are:
1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that a media take down order was not required in the circumstances of this case.
2 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the verdicts were not unreasonable in light of admissible evidence relating to the potential culpability of Lester Hamilton (deceased).
C The applications for leave to appeal are otherwise dismissed.
D Interim order suppressing the name of W and any identifying particulars made on 9 June 2023 is to continue until further order.
12 December 2023
B The applications for leave to appeal are granted in part ([W] v R [2023] NZCA 155). The approved questions are:
1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that a media take down order was not required in the circumstances of this case.
2 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the verdicts were not unreasonable in light of admissible evidence relating to the potential culpability of Lester Hamilton (deceased).
C The applications for leave to appeal are otherwise dismissed.
D Interim order suppressing the name of W and any identifying particulars made on 9 June 2023 is to continue until further order.
12 December 2023
Date of hearing
06 August 2024
- 07 August 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 6_7 August 2024 (PDF, 490 KB)
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Damien Shane Kuru v The King
Case number
SC 61/2023
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Kuru v R [2023] NZCA 150).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
10 August 2023
__________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The appellant’s conviction is set aside.
C Order under ss 233(3)(a) and 241(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 that a judgment of acquittal be entered.
20 December 2024
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
10 August 2023
__________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The appellant’s conviction is set aside.
C Order under ss 233(3)(a) and 241(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 that a judgment of acquittal be entered.
20 December 2024
Date of hearing
04 March 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Ellen France, Williams and Kós JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 4 March 2024 Appellant submissions (PDF, 579 KB)
- Hearing date 4 March 2024 Respondent submissions (PDF, 1.6 MB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 4 March 2024 transcript (PDF, 614 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 4 March 2024 SC 61/2023 (PDF, 454 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2024] NZSC 184 (PDF, 305 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
DAMIEN SHANE KURU v R [2023] NZSC 102 [10 August 2023] (PDF, 156 KB)
Substantive judgment
KURU v R [2024] NZSC 184 [20 December 2024] (PDF, 829 KB)
Videos
- SC 61/2023 Kuru v The King (Recorded, 4 March 2024)
Case name
Paki Nikora and Parearau Polly Alice Nikora on behalf of Te Kaunihera Kaumātua o Tūhoe v Tāmati Kruger on behalf of Tūhoe - Te Uru Taumatua Trust
Case number
SC 67/2023
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Kruger on behalf of Tūhoe Te Uru Taumatua Trust v Nikora on behalf of Te Kaunihera Kaumātua o Tūhoe [2023] NZCA 179).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the respondent’s appeal to that Court.
28 August 2023
_____________________________________________________________
A The application by the respondent to adduce the evidence of Te Whenua Te Kurapa is granted.
B The appeal is allowed.
C The orders made by the Māori Land Court in relation to trustee elections of the Tūhoe – Te Uru Taumatua Trust are reinstated (Nikora on behalf of Te Kaunihera Kaumātua o Tūhoe v Trustees of Tūhoe – Te Uru Taumatua (2021) 252 Waiariki MB 157 (252 WAR 157) at [85]).
D The trustees of the Tūhoe – Te Uru Taumatua Trust must pay the appellants their actual and reasonable legal costs and disbursements in connection with the appeal to this Court out of the assets of the Trust. If the parties are unable to agree on the amount of costs and disbursements payable, that will be determined by the Registrar of this Court.
E Any outstanding issues relating to costs in the Courts below are to be determined by those Courts, in light of this judgment.
3 October 2024
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the respondent’s appeal to that Court.
28 August 2023
_____________________________________________________________
A The application by the respondent to adduce the evidence of Te Whenua Te Kurapa is granted.
B The appeal is allowed.
C The orders made by the Māori Land Court in relation to trustee elections of the Tūhoe – Te Uru Taumatua Trust are reinstated (Nikora on behalf of Te Kaunihera Kaumātua o Tūhoe v Trustees of Tūhoe – Te Uru Taumatua (2021) 252 Waiariki MB 157 (252 WAR 157) at [85]).
D The trustees of the Tūhoe – Te Uru Taumatua Trust must pay the appellants their actual and reasonable legal costs and disbursements in connection with the appeal to this Court out of the assets of the Trust. If the parties are unable to agree on the amount of costs and disbursements payable, that will be determined by the Registrar of this Court.
E Any outstanding issues relating to costs in the Courts below are to be determined by those Courts, in light of this judgment.
3 October 2024
Date of hearing
27 February 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Williams, O'Regan, Collins JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 Appellant submissions (PDF, 8 MB)
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 Respondent submissions (PDF, 447 KB)
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 Intervener Submissions (PDF, 486 KB)
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 Joint Chronology (PDF, 150 KB)
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 Appellant Oral Outline (PDF, 718 KB)
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 Respondent Oral Outline (PDF, 1.9 MB)
- hearing date 27 February 2024 Intervener Oral Outline (PDF, 264 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 (PDF, 642 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 27 February 2024 SC 67 2023 (PDF, 475 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2024] NZSC 130 (PDF, 284 KB)
Additional document
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Damon Exley v NZME Publishing Limited and The King
Case number
SC 76/2023
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (NZME Publishing Ltd v E [2023] NZCA 258).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to quash the High Court takedown order.
19 October 2023
_________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The Court of Appeal was not correct to quash the High Court takedown order insofar as it related to the specific URLs identified in the takedown application.
30 July 2025
Date of hearing
06 August 2024
- 07 August 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 6_7 August 2024 (PDF, 490 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2025] NZSC 90 (PDF, 292 KB)
Substantive judgment
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Supreme court decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Mark Jospeh Hoggart v The King
Case number
SC 77/2023
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Mr Hoggart’s application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The applications for leave to appeal are granted in part ([W] v R [2023] NZCA 155). The approved questions are:
1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that a media take down order was not required in the circumstances of this case.
2 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the verdicts were not unreasonable in light of admissible evidence relating to the potential culpability of Lester Hamilton (deceased).
C The applications for leave to appeal are otherwise dismissed.
D Interim order suppressing the name of W and any identifying particulars made on 9 June 2023 is to continue until further order.
12 December 2023
B The applications for leave to appeal are granted in part ([W] v R [2023] NZCA 155). The approved questions are:
1 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that a media take down order was not required in the circumstances of this case.
2 Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the verdicts were not unreasonable in light of admissible evidence relating to the potential culpability of Lester Hamilton (deceased).
C The applications for leave to appeal are otherwise dismissed.
D Interim order suppressing the name of W and any identifying particulars made on 9 June 2023 is to continue until further order.
12 December 2023
Date of hearing
06 August 2024
- 07 August 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 6_7 August 2024 (PDF, 490 KB)
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
L (SC 80/2023) v The King
Case number
SC 80/2023
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (L (CA631/2021) v R [2023] NZCA 246).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
3 November 2023
_____________________________________________
The appeal is dismissed.
11 November 2024
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
3 November 2023
_____________________________________________
The appeal is dismissed.
11 November 2024
Date of hearing
19 March 2024
Judges
Glazebrook, Ellen France, Williams, Kós, Miller JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing 19 March 2024 Appellant oral outline (PDF, 198 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing 19 March 2024 (PDF, 385 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 19 March 2024 (PDF, 443 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2024] NZSC 153 (PDF, 263 KB)
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
L (SC 80/2023) v R [2023] NZSC 146 [3 November 2023] (PDF, 157 KB)
Supreme court decision
L (SC 80/2023) v R [2024] NZSC 153 [11 November 2024] (PDF, 556 KB)
Case name
Jane Alison Farish v The King
Case number
SC 90/2023
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Leave is granted in part (Dallison v R [2023] NZCA 282).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to make the order sought by the applicant under s 205(2)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011.
C The application for leave to appeal is otherwise dismissed.
D We make an order prohibiting publication of the applicant’s name, address, occupation and identifying particulars and of the information to which the application under s 205(2)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 relates until final resolution of the appeal to this Court.
30 October 2023
_______________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B We make an order prohibiting publication of this judgment, the media release and the minutes, and any information therein, until the judgment is delivered at 2.00 pm on 11 June 2024.
C We make an order prohibiting publication of certain evidence and submissions contained in this judgment pursuant to s 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011. See paragraph [82].
D We make an order redacting parts of the judgment that is made publicly available.
E We make an order that the files for this appeal are not to be searched without the leave of a Judge of this Court.
11 June 2024
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to make the order sought by the applicant under s 205(2)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011.
C The application for leave to appeal is otherwise dismissed.
D We make an order prohibiting publication of the applicant’s name, address, occupation and identifying particulars and of the information to which the application under s 205(2)(c) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 relates until final resolution of the appeal to this Court.
30 October 2023
_______________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B We make an order prohibiting publication of this judgment, the media release and the minutes, and any information therein, until the judgment is delivered at 2.00 pm on 11 June 2024.
C We make an order prohibiting publication of certain evidence and submissions contained in this judgment pursuant to s 205 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011. See paragraph [82].
D We make an order redacting parts of the judgment that is made publicly available.
E We make an order that the files for this appeal are not to be searched without the leave of a Judge of this Court.
11 June 2024
Date of hearing
28 February 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Ellen France, Williams and Miller JJ
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 28 February 2024 SC 90/2023 (PDF, 475 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2024] NZSC 65 (PDF, 333 KB)
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
F (SC 90/2023) v R [2023] NZSC 143 [30 October 2023] (PDF, 166 KB)
Substantive judgment
JANE ALISON FARISH v R [2024] NZSC 65 [11 June 2024] (PDF, 316 KB)
Case name
Ian James Burden, PGT Reclaimed (International) Limited and Plantation Grown Timbers (Vietnam) Limited v ESR Group (NZ) Limited
Case number
SC 96/2023
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (ESR Group (NZ) Ltd v Burden [2023] NZCA 335).
B The approved questions are as follows:
(a) Was the Court of Appeal correct to conclude, for the purposes of s 9(1) of the Copyright Act 1994, that a copyright holder’s consent is not necessary for a work to be “in circulation”?
(b) Was the Court of Appeal correct to conclude, for the purposes of s 9(1) of the Copyright Act 1994, that circulation outside of New Zealand could constitute “circulation”?
7 December 2023
_____________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The High Court order awarding damages is reinstated.
C The respondent must pay the appellants costs of $25,000, plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
D Costs in the Courts below, if not agreed, can be settled by those Courts.
25 March 2025
B The approved questions are as follows:
(a) Was the Court of Appeal correct to conclude, for the purposes of s 9(1) of the Copyright Act 1994, that a copyright holder’s consent is not necessary for a work to be “in circulation”?
(b) Was the Court of Appeal correct to conclude, for the purposes of s 9(1) of the Copyright Act 1994, that circulation outside of New Zealand could constitute “circulation”?
7 December 2023
_____________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The High Court order awarding damages is reinstated.
C The respondent must pay the appellants costs of $25,000, plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
D Costs in the Courts below, if not agreed, can be settled by those Courts.
25 March 2025
Date of hearing
26 April 2024
Judges
Glazebrook, Ellen France, Williams Kós and O'Regan JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Appellants Submissions (PDF, 2.3 MB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Appellants Chronology Fact (PDF, 194 KB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Appellants Chronology WCT dates (PDF, 215 KB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Appellants Roadmap (PDF, 177 KB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Appellants Further Submissions (PDF, 279 KB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Respondent submissions (PDF, 351 KB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Respondent Roadmap (PDF, 225 KB)
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 Respondent Further Submissions (PDF, 870 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 (PDF, 471 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 26 April 2024 (PDF, 447 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2025] NZSC 18 (PDF, 291 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Seafood New Zealand Limited v Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated, Minister of Oceans and Fisheries and Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Limited
Case number
SC 99/2023
Summary
Civil appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Fisheries Inshore New Zealand Ltd v Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc [2023] NZCA 359).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
24 November 2023
____________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed to the extent set out at [145] and [146].
B Costs are reserved.
12 September 2024
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
24 November 2023
____________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed to the extent set out at [145] and [146].
B Costs are reserved.
12 September 2024
Date of hearing
23 April 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 23 and 24 April 2024 Appellant submissions (PDF, 1.1 MB)
- Hearing date 23 and 24 April 2024 Appellant chronology (PDF, 767 KB)
- Hearing date 23 and 24 April 2024 First Respondent submissions (PDF, 416 KB)
- Hearing date 23 and 24 April 2024 First Respondent Oral outline (PDF, 137 KB)
- Hearing date 23 and 24 April 2024 Second Respondent submissions (PDF, 602 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 23 April 2024 (PDF, 643 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 23 and 24 April 2024 (PDF, 366 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2024] NZSC 111 (PDF, 282 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Videos
- SC 99/2023 Seafood NZ v Royal Forest and Bird (Recorded, 23 April 2024)
Page 6 of 22