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
Frank Louis Miessen v The Queen
Case number
SC 59/2006
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction for threatening to kill – former police officer threatening to kill the Prime Minister – whether verdict unreasonable and cannot be supported having regard to the evidence – whether Crown counsel’s opening statement improper – whether counsel error in failing to call evidence or put substantial defence – admissibility of evidence – whether defendant detained by police – whether police gave defendant adequate Bill of Rights advice and caution. CA 222/05 6 July 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
26 September 2006
26 September 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MIESSEN V R SC 59/2006 [26 September 2006] (PDF, 15 KB)
Case name
Keith Hugh Nicholas Berryman and Margaret Berryman v The New Zealand Defence Force
Case number
SC 62/2006
Summary
Civil – costs award – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding an allegation of misconduct against a non-party was irrelevant to a costs order – allegation against armed forces of negligence in the construction of the applicants’ bridge – allegation that armed forces have abused the process of the Court – applicants held not to be entitled to documents sought in application for non-party discovery – costs principles. CA 95/05 13 July 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
31 October 2006
31 October 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Noel Clement Rogers v Television New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 68/2006
Summary
Civil – privacy – freedom of expression – order for permanent injunction, suppressing publication of video tape, made by High Court and quashed by Court of Appeal – tape contained reconstruction of murder by applicant – tape ruled inadmissible at murder trial due to breaches of New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – applicant acquitted at trial – claim that publication of tape would constitute unlawful interference with applicant’s privacy – whether Court of Appeal erred in giving insufficient weight to principles of proper and fair administration of justice – applicability of defence of legitimate public concern – threshold for prior restraint. CA 12/06 7 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. 17 October 2006
___________________
Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
16 November 2007
___________________
Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
16 November 2007
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 91 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Anthony Arbuthnot v Chief Executive of the Department of Work and Income
Case number
SC 82/2006
Summary
Civil – applicant was overpaid benefits – whether Court of Appeal erred in confusing review and appeal provisions under statute with administrative power of review – whether the decision of the Benefit Review Committee on the status of the beneficiary could only be reviewed by the Chief Executive on the basis of new information or some change in circumstance – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that it would not be an abuse of process for the Chief Executive to be able to put an issue decided in the beneficiary’s favour before the Authority at the time the beneficiary appealed other issues – whether a decision of the BRC varying a decision of the Chief Executive creates an estoppel against the Chief Executive – whether the Court of Appeal erred in not distinguishing between the decision of the Chief Executive, and the decision as modified by the Authority. CA 256/05 3 October 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. 8 March 2007 _______________________ Appeal dismissed. Cost reserved.
19 July 2007
19 July 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Patricia Linda Owens v The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development
Case number
SC 89/2006
Summary
Summary Civil – applicant in receipt of benefits paid by Work and Income – failure to declare interest in a flat which was rented out – applicant did not deliberately mislead WINZ – whether inequitable for WINZ to seek repayment of accommodation supplement – whether relative fault can be taken into account for the purposes of s 86(9A) Social Security Act 1964 – whether principles from common law change of position defence apply to s 86(9A).CA 131/05, CA 132/05 30 October 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $1500 to respondent.
20 February 2007
20 February 2007
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Wayne Peter Hitchings v The Queen
Case number
SC 98/2006
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – whether material acquired by the Crown was evidence “going to rebut notified alibi defences and therefore not disclosable” or whether it was material that would assist the defence and therefore disclosable as of right – whether failure to disclose the evidence prejudiced the defence preparation for trial – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that applicant would have had difficulty presenting two alibi defences, when the underlying argument was that the applicant was at home at the relevant time – whether evidence was inconsistent with this defence – whether trial was unfair. CA 519/05 27 November 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 9 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HITCHINGS v R SC 98/2006 [9 March 2007] (PDF, 19 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Norman William Jack and Judith Anne Jack v Murray Clive Guy
Case number
SC 1/2005
Summary
Nature of contract - whether contract between parties was one of sale and purchase or one of agency - whether contract breached - whether contract terminated - on whom the burden of proof rests when a defence is raised under s7(3)(c) Contractual Remedies Act 1979. CA164/03 1 December 2004
Result
Leave to appeal refused.
11 March 2005
11 March 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JACK AND JACK V GUY SC SC 1/2005 [11 March 2005] (PDF, 20 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Robert Frank Terry v The Queen
Case number
SC 23/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal against conviction - forensic analysis report only disclosed to defence at time of trial - effect of late disclosure. CA 490/04 20 April 2005
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed.
23 June 2005
23 June 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TERRY V R SC 23/2005 [23 June 2005] (PDF, 13 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
David John Young v Land Transport Safety Authority
Case number
SC 33/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal - appeal against the decision of the High Court - leave to appeal refused by the Court of Appeal - whether defence of self-defence correctly applied to facts. CRI 2004 409 000196, 29 November 2004
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 27 July 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Richard Geoffrey Bull v The Queen
Case number
SC 48/2005
Summary
Criminal law - whether defence counsel conduct resulted in a miscarriage of justice - whether total sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment was manifestly excessive. CA 143/04 8 November 2004
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 8 December 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BULL v R SC 48/2005 [8 December 2005] (PDF, 19 KB)
Page 23 of 24