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.
31 July 2026
Case information summary (as at 31 July 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 31 July 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 131 KB)
All years
Case name
Chesterfields Preschools Limited, David John Hampton and others v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 90/2009
Summary
Civil – GST Act 1995 - Costs awards – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the appeals of the Commissioner for a stay of payment of costs awards in favour of the applicant.[2009] NZCA 373 CA 607/2008 25 August 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $3,000 plus disbursements to the respondent. 8 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
JD & CE Henson Partnership and others v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 95/2009
Summary
Civil – Tax Administration Act 1994 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining what is sufficient to constitute a statutory Notice of Assessment – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly stated that the applicants’ assessments were subsequently amended – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the Taxation Review Authority addressed the correctness of the assessments without objection from the applicants – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the Taxation Review Authority had jurisdiction under the Notices of Assessment.[2009] NZCA 423 CA 661/2008 22 September 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondents of $3,000 plus disbursements. 15 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Contract Pacific Limited v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 114/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Taxation – Whether the Commissioner satisfied the time limits contained in s 46 of the Goods and Services Tax Act 1985 – Whether Contract Pacific had already been paid a refund for the purposes of s 241 (6) (a) of the Taxation (Taxpayer Assessment and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2001. [2009] NZCA 568 CA 759/2009 4 December 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
4 March 2010
__________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent, plus disbursements.
16 November 2010
4 March 2010
__________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent, plus disbursements.
16 November 2010
Transcripts
- sc 114 2009 contract pacific v ird (PDF, 384 KB)
Media Releases
- sc 114 2009 contract pacific media (PDF, 85 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
The Attorney-General of New Zealand v Mervyn Chapman
Case number
SC 120/2009
Summary
Civil – Crown liability for judicial breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by holding that the Attorney-General is the correct defendant in an action alleging breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 by a Registrar and judges of the Court of Appeal – If not, whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by holding that the Attorney-General is not entitled to the same immunities as the person who committed the alleged breaches.[2009] NZCA 552 CA 245/2008 25 November 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. The approved ground is whether Bill of Rights damages can be ordered against the Attorney-General on behalf of the Crown for breach of fair trial rights by judicial conduct in respect of which the judicial officer is immune from liability.
31 March 2010
31 March 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 December 2010 SC 120/2009 (PDF, 782 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2011] NZSC 110 (PDF, 108 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Manu Chhotubhai Bhanabhai and Douglas Mark Andrew Burgress v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 11/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – as part of an agreement to settle GST arrears arising from the development of an apartment complex, solicitors for property developers gave an undertaking to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue that arrears would be cleared using proceeds from the sale of certain apartment units – in the event, GST arrears not paid – property developers put into liquidation - liquidators commenced proceedings, to which Commissioner was party, against the directors for reckless trading – proceedings settled in favour of liquidators with large cash payment, although no portion of payment could be applied towards the debt owed to the Commissioner – in separate proceedings, giving rise to present application, Commissioner awarded compensation against solicitors in their personal capacity for breach of undertaking – whether factual findings and reasoning at first instance were incorrect - whether the Court of Appeal erred in treatment of certain evidence going towards the nature of the undertaking – whether, given the antecedent proceedings by the liquidators, the claim by the Commissioner amounted to an abuse of process. CA 218/05 20 December 2006
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 26 April 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Austin, Nichols & Co. Inc v Stichting Lodestar
Case number
SC 21/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – Trade Marks Act 1953 – whether, in hearing an appeal from the Assistant Commissioner of Trade Marks, the High Court must have deference to the Assistant Commission’s findings, only overturning a decision that can fairly be characterised as wrong – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of its own powers under the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 in determining the appeal from the High Court decision – whether the Court of Appeal erred by ignoring the onus on the trade mark applicant to discharge the burden of demonstrating that registration of its trade mark would not lead to a likelihood of confusion or deception. CA 94/05 12 March 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
7 June 2007
______________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $7,5000 plus disbursements to the respondent.
7 June 2007
______________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $7,5000 plus disbursements to the respondent.
Transcripts
- Hearing date 17 October 2007 (PDF, 244 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 103 (PDF, 88 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Aqua Technics Pool and Spa Centre New Zealand Limited v Aqua-Tech Limited
Case number
SC 24/2007
Summary
Civil – proprietorship of trade mark – Trademarks Act 1953 – Assistant Commissioner of Trade Marks declined to register “Aqua-Tech” as a trademark in relation to spa and swimming pools – decision overturned by High Court and Court of Appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the High Court’s finding that Aqua-Tech had established public use of the trademark. CA 257/05 22 March 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with Costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
9 July 2007
9 July 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Ben Nevis Forestry Ventures Limited, Bristol Forestry Ventures Limited, Clive Richard Bradbury, Greenmass Limited, Gregory Alan Peebles and Estate of the Late Kenneth John Laird v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 43/2007
Summary
Civil – income tax appeals – designated as test cases by Commissioner – all appellants investors in “Trinity” forestry scheme – whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding Commissioner’s assessments – correct approach to application of Peterson v CIR [2006] 3 NZLR 433 – whether appellants’ investment in scheme a tax avoidance arrangement within meaning of ss BB 9 and BG 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 – whether insurance premiums required to be spread under accruals rules – whether Commissioner’s power to reconstruct arrangements to eliminate improper tax advantage exercised correctly – whether appellants took an abusive tax position – whether application of penalties to the appellants wrong in law and excessive.CA 21/05 11 June 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
9 October 2007
____________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondent.
19 December 2008
9 October 2007
____________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondent.
19 December 2008
Media Releases
- MR [2008] NZSC 115 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Recall judgment
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Hearing date : 8 February 2008
Hearing date : 23 – 27 June 2008
Elias CJ, Tipping, McGrath Gault, Anderson JJ
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Accent Management Limited, Lexington Resources Limited, and Redcliffe Forestry Ventures Limited v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 44/2007
Summary
Civil – income tax appeals – designated as test cases by Commissioner – all appellants investors in “Trinity” forestry scheme – whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding Commissioner’s assessments – correct approach to application of Peterson v CIR [2006] 3 NZLR 433 – whether appellants’ investment in scheme a tax avoidance arrangement within meaning of ss BB 9 and BG 1 of the Income Tax Act 1994 – whether insurance premiums required to be spread under accruals rules – whether Commissioner’s power to reconstruct arrangements to eliminate improper tax advantage exercised correctly – whether appellants took an abusive tax position – whether application of penalties to the appellants wrong in law and excessive.CA 21/05 11 June 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
9 October 2007
_____________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondent.
19 December 2008
9 October 2007
_____________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to the respondent.
19 December 2008
Media Releases
- MR [2008] NZSC 115 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Recall judgment
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Substantive judgment /Media release
Transcript
Hearing date : 8 February 2008
Hearing date : 8 – 10 July 2008
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath , Anderson JJ
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Ch’elle Properties (NZ) Limited v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 46/2007
Summary
Summary Civil appeal – Goods and Services Tax Act 1985 – whether s 76 constitutes an objective or subjective test – whether there can be tax avoidance where there is no tax advantage.CA 126/04 25 June 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 6 September 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 13 of 15