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
Frederickus Petrus Maria Van Brandenberg v MacGregor Robin Muir and Rosemary Ellen Muir
Case number
SC 61/2005
Summary
Civil District Court Judge acting as an arbitrator - whether Judge’s status conferred upon the parties the benefits of public funding and public facilities in the resolution of their dispute and whether non-statutory rights can be granted to a judicial officer. CA 46/04 6 September 2005
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 8 November 2005
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Robert Arthur Felton and Norah Isabel Felton and others v Annette Frances Johnson
Case number
SC 62/2005
Summary
Relationship property agreement between spouses that has the effect of defeating the creditors of either spouse - whether application to avoid agreement must be made within a two-year limitation period – Property (Relationships) Act 1976, s 47(2)CA 40/04 12 September 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
8 December 2005
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript
Case name
Eastern Services Limited v No 68 Limited
Case number
SC 64/2005
Summary
Civil appeal -whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondent's claim was not time-barred by the Limitation Act 1950 or by analogy with that section - whether statutory limitation periods are relevant to the Court's discretion in the exercise of the equitable defence of laches -“ whether the Court of Appeal erred in their statement of the test for laches.CA 173/04 20 September 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted. 9 December 2005
Media Releases
- MR [2006] NZSC 42 (PDF, 88 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Robert John Condon v The Queen
Case number
SC 66/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal - trial judge's refusal to grant adjournment following withdrawal of counsel leading to accused representing himself at trial - accused convicted and sentenced to imprisonment - whether breach of Sentencing Act 2002, s 30(1) or New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 24 - applicant seeking leave to appeal out of timeCA 373/03 21 July 2004
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
27 March 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcription
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Roger Wilson Steele and Christine Lynne Roberts v Eleftarious Serepisos
Case number
SC 68/2005
Summary
Civil appeal – whether the vendor subdivider was entitled to bring the contract to an end or treat it as at an end because the provisions of s 225 of the Resource Management Act 1991 had not been fulfilled within a reasonable time - whether the vendor was obliged to give the purchaser notice of their intention to bring the contract to an end or allow the purchaser an opportunity fulfil the conditions of s 225 of the Act.CA 203/04 12 October 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted to appellant and respondent. 15 February 2006 ______________________________ The appeal is allowed.
The cross-appeal is dismissed.
The orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
In their place we make an order for the entry of judgment in the High Court in favour of the appellants.
The appellants are to have costs in the High Court as fixed by that Court in the light of this judgment, and in the Court of Appeal the appellants are to have costs of $6,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court.
The appellants are to have costs in this Court of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of this Court. 4 September 2006
The cross-appeal is dismissed.
The orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
In their place we make an order for the entry of judgment in the High Court in favour of the appellants.
The appellants are to have costs in the High Court as fixed by that Court in the light of this judgment, and in the Court of Appeal the appellants are to have costs of $6,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court.
The appellants are to have costs in this Court of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of this Court. 4 September 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Jason John Cumming v The Queen
Case number
SC 72/2005
Summary
Criminal appeal - whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding an accused should be allowed to invoke right of self-representation where their decision was "fully informed and deliberate" whether the trial judges summing up and other interventions during the course of the trial led to a miscarriage of justice.CA 43/03 2 November 2005.
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
27 March 2006
_____________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed. New trial ordered.
15 May 2008
27 March 2006
_____________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed. New trial ordered.
15 May 2008
Date of hearing
19 October 2006
Judges
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, Anderson and Gault JJ: substantive hearing: 28 February 2008
Media Releases
- mediarelease sc722005cummingvr 000 (PDF, 87 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
CUMMING V R SC 72/2005 [27 March 2006] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
CUMMING v R SC 72/2005 [15 May 2008] (PDF, 51 KB)
Case name
Waitakere City Council v Estate Homes Limited
Case number
SC 73/2005
Summary
Resource management - whether Court of Appeal erred in answering four questions of law - whether a subdivision consent application can be altered by the local authority, and granted subject to the alterations, as long as no prejudice arises to the applicant, other parties, or public - whether a consent can be granted subject to conditions more favourable than those applied for - whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that construction of road fell within s108(2)(c) RMA - whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that acquisition of centre part of road fell within s322(2)(a) Local Government Act 1974 - whether Court of Appeal erred in sending proceedings back to Environment Court.CA 210/04 11 November 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
4 April 2006
_____________________________
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appeal is referred back to the Environment Court to be determined in accordance with this judgment. Estate Homes must pay the Council costs in the sum of $10,000 plus reasonable disbursements. Costs in the other Courts are to be fixed by those Courts.
19 December 2006
4 April 2006
_____________________________
The appeal is allowed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appeal is referred back to the Environment Court to be determined in accordance with this judgment. Estate Homes must pay the Council costs in the sum of $10,000 plus reasonable disbursements. Costs in the other Courts are to be fixed by those Courts.
19 December 2006
Transcripts
- Hearing date 11 July 2006 (PDF, 1.3 MB)
Media Releases
- waitakerecitycouncilmediarelease (PDF, 108 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Otago Station Estates Limited v John Robert Parker; and David John Parker and Lorraine Maree Parker.
Case number
SC CIV 6/2004
Summary
Civil appeal - method of payment of a deposit in a conveyancing transaction where notice of intention to cancel for non-payment of deposit has been given - whether payment in law requires legal tender or whether tendering a personal cheque is sufficient. CA 158/03 10 June 2004
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
12 October 2004
_____________________
The appeal is dismissed. Costs in favour of the respondents are to be fixed following receipt of memoranda of counsel.
19 April 2005
12 October 2004
_____________________
The appeal is dismissed. Costs in favour of the respondents are to be fixed following receipt of memoranda of counsel.
19 April 2005
Transcripts
- Hearing date 12 October 2004 (PDF, 63 KB)
- Hearing date 15 March 2005 (PDF, 257 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Wynston Alexander Cecil Chirnside & Rattray Properties Limited v Richard Elmore Fay
Case number
SC CIV 7/2004
Summary
Civil appeal – commercial relationship for the purposes of property development – whether this gave rise to a joint venture of a commercial kind – whether a fiduciary relationship can arise where parties are negotiating towards a joint venture – whether in this case the parties owed fiduciary obligations to each other.
Result
A. The appeal and cross-appeal are each allowed in part.
B. The damages and interest awards made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
C. The judgment entered for Mr Fay against Mr Chirnside in the High Court is varied from $495,000 to $850,000 plus interest as awarded by the High Court.
D. Judgment is entered for Mr Fay against Rattray Properties Ltd for $850,000 plus interest in the same terms as awarded against Mr Chirnside. E. The caveat lodged by Mr Fay against the title to the Harvey Norman project is to be removed. F. Mr Chirnside is to pay Mr Fay costs in respect of the proceedings in this court in the total sum of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the registrar. The costs awarded to Mr Fay in the Court of Appeal are increased from $4,000 to $10,000. Costs in the High Court are to remain as fixed by that court. 6 September 2006
B. The damages and interest awards made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
C. The judgment entered for Mr Fay against Mr Chirnside in the High Court is varied from $495,000 to $850,000 plus interest as awarded by the High Court.
D. Judgment is entered for Mr Fay against Rattray Properties Ltd for $850,000 plus interest in the same terms as awarded against Mr Chirnside. E. The caveat lodged by Mr Fay against the title to the Harvey Norman project is to be removed. F. Mr Chirnside is to pay Mr Fay costs in respect of the proceedings in this court in the total sum of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the registrar. The costs awarded to Mr Fay in the Court of Appeal are increased from $4,000 to $10,000. Costs in the High Court are to remain as fixed by that court. 6 September 2006
Transcripts
- Hearing date 14 and 15 November 2005 (PDF, 619 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2006] NZSC 68 (PDF, 104 KB)
Supreme court decision
Minute granting leave (PDF, 12 KB)
Supreme court decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Union House Limited and Union House Lease Limited v Auckland City Council.
Case number
SC CIV 11/2004
Summary
Civil appeal - contract interpretation - whether contract unassignable because of the existence of a confidentiality clause prohibiting disclosure of the terms of the agreement - whether the assignment was ineffective where the assigning party breached the confidentiality clause - whether the case should have been remitted back to the High Court to determine whether the pleadings could be amended to allege a breach of the confidentiality clause.
CA162/03 11 August 2004
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
15 December 2004
___________________
Appeal Hearing Date
22 March 2005
_____________
Notice of abandonment of appeal being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
23 March 2005
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcription
Judgment appealed from
Page 78 of 80