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
Fiona Margaret Mead v Lilach Paul and Brett Paul
Case number
SC 7/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Paul v Mead) [2021] NZCA 649).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal.
22 March 2022
______________________________________

A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay the first respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
20 June 2023
Date of hearing
22 July 2022
Judges
Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France, Williams and Kós JJ
Case name
Todd William Frank Sutton and Todd William Frank Sutton and Hoffman Trustees Limited as trustees of the Todd Sutton Trust v Joana Elisia Bell
Case number
SC 8/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Sutton v Bell [2021] NZCA 645).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
12 April 2022
________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellants must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
1 June 2023
Date of hearing
02 August 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Kós JJ
Media Releases
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Substantive judgment
Case name
Robert Roper v Mariya Ann Taylor and Attorney-General
Case number
SC 16/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Taylor v Roper [2020] NZCA 268 reissued 16 December 2021 and Taylor v Roper [2021] NZCA 691).
B Leave to the First Respondent to cross appeal is granted.
17 May 2022
______________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We uphold the conclusion of the High Court Judge dismissing the claim by Ms Taylor for compensatory damages in relation to false imprisonment.
B The cross appeal is dismissed.
C Costs are reserved.
12 May 2023
______________________________________________
A There are no costs orders in this Court.
B Costs in the Courts below are to be dealt with by those Courts.
4 July 2023
Date of hearing
05 October 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Williams and William Young JJ
Case name
Alan Russell Hall v The Queen
Case number
SC 21/2022
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B Leave to appeal is granted (R v Hall [1987] 1 NZLR 616 (CA)).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
3 May 2022
_____________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The convictions of the appellant are quashed.
C Order under s 385(2) of the Crimes Act 1961 directing that verdicts of acquittal be entered.
8 June 2022
Date of hearing
08 June 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, O'Regan, Ellen France, Williams and Kós JJ
Transcripts
Media Releases
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Attorney-General v Mariya Ann Taylor and Robert Roper
Case number
SC 23/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Taylor v Roper [2020] NZCA 268 reissued 16 December 2021 and Taylor v Roper [2021] NZCA 691).
B Leave to the First Respondent to cross appeal is granted.
17 May 2022
________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We uphold the conclusion of the High Court Judge dismissing the claim by Ms Taylor for compensatory damages in relation to false imprisonment.
B The cross appeal is dismissed.
C Costs are reserved.
12 May 2023
________________________________________________________
A There are no costs orders in this Court.
B Costs in the Courts below are to be dealt with by those Courts.
4 July 2023
Date of hearing
05 October 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Williams and William Young JJ
Case name
Attorney-General and Chief Executive of Ara Poutama Aotearoa | Department of Corrections v Mark David Chisnall
Case number
SC 26/2022
Summary

Civil Appeal

Result

A Leave to appeal and to cross-appeal is granted (Chisnall v Attorney-General [2021] NZCA 616 and Chisnall v Attorney-General [2022] NZCA 24).
B The approved questions are as follows:
(a) Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to make declarations that Part 1A of the Parole Act 2002 [extended supervision orders] and the Public Safety (Public Protection Orders) Act 2014 [public safety orders] are inconsistent with s 26(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 [the Bill of Rights]; and
(b) Whether the Court of Appeal was correct not to make declarations that extended supervision orders and public safety orders are inconsistent with ss 9, 22, 23(5), 25(a), (c) and (d), and 26(1) of the Bill of Rights.
22 June 2022
__________________________________
A The appeal is allowed in part.
B The cross-appeal is dismissed.
C We seek submissions from counsel on the form of the declarations of inconsistency, as set out at [269].
D Costs are reserved.
19 December 2024
__________________________________
A We make the declarations of inconsistency set out at [18].
B The appellants must pay the respondent one set of costs of $70,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
30 September 2025

Date of hearing
03 April 2023 - 04 April 2023
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Williams and Kós JJ
Case Synopses
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Jason Brendon Philip v The King
Case number
SC 32/2022
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A The appeal against sentence is allowed. The sentence of two years and 11 months’ imprisonment is quashed and a sentence of one year and seven months is substituted.
B The standard conditions under s 14(1) of the Parole Act 2002 apply but expire on the sentence expiry date.
16 December 2022
Date of hearing
08 September 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Case name
Barry Bai and Caoping Ding v Thomas Edmund William James and Iain McLennan, Keaton Pronk and McDonald Vague Limited
Case number
SC 36/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 25 March 2022 (Ding v James [2022] NZSC 28) is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal in SC 36/2022 is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
11 May 2022
Case name
Kaine Van Hemert v The King
Case number
SC 38/2022
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A The applications for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal (R v Van Hemert [2021] NZCA 261) [the Court of Appeal judgment] and the decision of the High Court (R v Van Hemert [2021] NZHC 2877) resentencing Mr Van Hemert [the resentencing judgment] are granted.

B Leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment and the resentencing judgment is granted.

C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the presumption in favour of life imprisonment in s 102 of the Sentencing Act 2002 was not displaced given the circumstances of the offence and of the applicant.
3 August 2022
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A The appeal against sentence is allowed.
B The minimum period of imprisonment of 11 years and six months is quashed and a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years is substituted.
31 August 2023
Date of hearing
18 November 2022
Judges
Glazebrook, O’Regan, Ellen France, Williams and Kós JJ
Case name
Aston-Edward William Earnest Wedgwood v The King
Case number
SC 43/2022
Summary
Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal