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
Auckland Council v Wendco (NZ) Limited and Wiri Licensing Trust
Case number
SC 14/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Resource Management Act 1991, s 95E – Whether the Court of Appeal interpreted the phrase “related to” in s 95E too broadly – Whether the first respondent is an affected person in terms of the second respondent’s application for resource consent. [2015] NZCA 617  CA 379/2014
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Wendco (NZ) Ltd v Auckland Council [2015] NZCA 617).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the Auckland Council was required to give Wendco (NZ) Ltd notification of the resource consent application made by the Wiri Licensing Trust.
16 June 2016
_____________________
A The appeal is allowed, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the judgment of Peters J reinstated.
B Costs in the High Court are to be fixed in that Court.
C Costs in the Court of Appeal are to be fixed by that Court.  
D In this Court, the first respondent is to pay the appellant costs of $10,000 and the second respondent costs of $5,000 along with, in both instances, reasonable disbursements.
17 July 2017
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
WENDCO (NZ) LIMITED v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2014] NZHC 1481 [27 June 2014]
Court of Appeal decision
WENDCO (NZ) LIMITED v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2015] NZCA 617 [18 December 2015]
Leave judgment - leave granted
AUCKLAND COUNCIL v WENDCO (NZ) LIMITED [2016] NZSC 67 [16 June 2016] (PDF, 9 KB)
Substantive judgment
AUCKLAND COUNCIL v WENDCO (NZ) LIMITED [2017] NZSC 113 [17 July 2017] (PDF, 368 KB)
Case name
Ivan Vladimir Joseph Erceg v Lynette Therese Erceg and Darryl Edward Gregory as Trustees of Acorn Foundation Trust and Lynette Therese Erceg and Darryl Edward Gregory as Trustees of Independent Group Trust
Case number
SC 17/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct test for requests by beneficiaries for access to trust documents – Whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct test for review of a trustee’ s decision – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the High Court decision not to order disclosure of trust documents.  [2016] NZCA 7   CA217/2015
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Erceg v Erceg [2016] NZCA 7, [2016] 2 NZLR 622).
B The approved question is: Should the conclusion that disclosure not be made/required be set-aside?
17 June 2016
____________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay to the respondents costs of $25,000 plus reasonable disbursements (to be fixed by the Registrar in the absence of agreement between the parties).  We certify for two counsel.
8 March 2017
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
ERCEG v ERCEG [2015] NZHC 594 [27 March 2015]
Court of Appeal decision
ERCEG v ERCEG [2016] NZCA 7 [4 February 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
IVAN VLADIMIR JOSEPH ERCEG v LYNETTE THERESE ERCEG AND DARRYL EDWARD GREGORY AS TRUSTEES OF ACORN FOUNDATION TRUST [2016] NZSC 69 [17 June 2016] (PDF, 9 KB)
Supreme court decision
Non-publication order dismissed: IVAN VLADIMIR JOSEPH ERCEG v LYNETTE THERESE ERCEG AND DARRYL EDWARD GREGORY AS TRUSTEES OF ACORN FOUNDATION TRUST [2016] NZSC 135 [14 October 2016] (PDF, 187 KB)
Substantive judgment
ERCEG v ERCEG [2017] NZSC 28 [8 March 2017] (PDF, 368 KB)
Case name
Isaac Paparoa v The Queen
Case number
SC 22/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against the imposition of a Minimum Period of Imprisonment.[2015] NZCA 234  CA 389/2014
Result
A  Extension of time for filing application for leave to appeal granted.
B  Application for leave to appeal dismissed.                            
30 May 2016                                                                                                                 __
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ISAAC PAPAROA v R [2016] NZSC 59     30 May 2016 (PDF, 113 KB)
Judgment appealed from

THOMPSON & PAPAROA V R CA368/2014 [2015] NZCA 234    11 June 2015
Case name
C v The Queen
Case number
SC 23/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.[2016] NZCA 48  CA 287/2015 CA 161/2015
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

____________________

Judgment released                                                                                              

Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final dispositon of related trials of Appellants C (SC 23/2016) and L (SC 24/2016). Publication in Law Report or Law Digest permitted.                                                                                                                       

19 June 2017                            
Leave judgment

not publicly available
Judgment appealed from

JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ not electronically available
Case name
AL v The Queen
Case number
SC 24/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.[2016] NZCA 48 CA 287/2015 CA 161/2015 
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

____________________

Judgment released                                                                                              

Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final dispositon of related trials of Appellants C (SC 23/2016) and L (SC 24/2016). Publication in Law Report or Law Digest permitted.

19 June 2017                       
Leave judgment

not publicly available
Judgment appealed from

[2016] NZCA 48 CA 287/2015 CA 161/2015 not available
Case name
SL v The Queen
Case number
SC 25/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury  [2016] NZCA 48  CA 162/2015
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

__________________________

A notice of abandonment having been lodged, the appeal is deemed dismissed.
31 March 2017
Hearing

21 and 22 November 2016

William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold, O'Regan and McGrath JJ
Judgment appealed from

[2016] NZCA 48 CA 287/2015 CA 161/2015 not available
Case name
JBG  v The Queen
Case number
SC 27/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury. [2016] NZCA 48  CA 160/2015
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

____________________

Judgment released                                                                                              

Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final dispositon of related trials of Appellants C (SC 23/2016) and L (SC 24/2016). Publication in Law Report or Law Digest permitted.                                                                                                                     

19 June 2017                            
Leave judgment

 not publicly available
Judgment appealed from

 [2016] NZCA 48  CA 160/2015 not available
Case name
JPC  v The Queen
Case number
SC 28/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Misuse of Drugs Act 1975 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the offence for controlled drug analogues is sufficiently certain to found a safe prosecution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge’s directions were correct – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in regard to the mens rea requirements for the offence – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct in relation to the defences available to the applicants – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the question whether a substance is a controlled drug analogue is one for the jury.[2016] NZCA 48  CA 145/2015 
Result

A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to all applicants (JPC v R [2016] NZCA 48) (Ellen France P, Wild and Miller JJ).
B Subject to order C below, the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicants’ appeal against conviction.
C In relation to JPC's application for leave to appeal against conviction, the approved question is qualified so as to exclude his contention that the verdicts on one charge on which he was acquitted and another on which he was convicted were inconsistent.
D JPC’s application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.

14 July 2016

_____________________

Judgment released                                                                                              

Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final dispositon of related trials of Appellants C (SC 23/2016) and L (SC 24/2016). Publication in Law Report or Law Digest permitted. 

19 June 2017                            
Leave judgment

not publicly available
Judgment appealed from

[2016] NZCA 48  CA 145/2015 not available
Case name
Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 32/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal incorrectly assessed the applicant’s entitlement under the insurance policy issued by the respondent – Whether the applicant is entitled to relief from the parties’ settlement agreement under s 6 of the Contractual Mistakes Act 1977.[2016] NZCA 67  CA 400/2015
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Prattley Enterprises Limited v Vero Insurance New Zealand Limited [2016] NZCA 67).
B The approved grounds are:
(a) the nature and extent of the respondent’s liability under the insurance policy; and
(b) the effect of the release.
20 June 2016
____________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Prattley is to pay Vero costs of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.                                   
6 December 2016
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2015] NZHC 1444 [24 June 2015]
Court of Appeal decision
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZCA 67 [14 March 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LTD v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZSC 70 [20 June 2016] (PDF, 112 KB)
Substantive judgment
PRATTLEY ENTERPRISES LIMITED v VERO INSURANCE NEW ZEALAND LIMITED [2016] NZSC 158 [6 December 2016] (PDF, 378 KB)
Case name
Amanda Adele White and Anne Leoline Emily Freeman v Christopher Maurice Lynch and Stuart Gordon Spence
Case number
SC 33/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal Civil Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the Deputy Registrar’s decision to decline to dispense with security for costs. [2016] NZCA 78   CA 740/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.                 
17 May 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
AMANDA ADELE WHITE v CHRISTOPHER MAURICE LYNCH [2016] NZSC 55    17 May 2016 (PDF, 71 KB)
Judgment appealed from

WHITE v LYNCH [2016] NZCA 78     22 March 2016
HC judgment 
White v Lynch [2015] NZHC 3202   15 December 2015
HC judgment 
White v Lynch [2015] NZHC 1020      14 May 2015
Page 36 of 80