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
David Raymond Lewis v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 31/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against an extended supervision order made in the District Court.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.                                                            
13 June 2018
Case name
Mark Robert Sandman v Colin Charles McKay, Roger David Cann and David John Clark
Case number
SC 35/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (McKay v Sandman [2018] NZCA 103, [2018] NZAR 707).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents on the cause of action against them.
7 August 2018
________________________
A  The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the respondents.  
16 April 2019
Case name
Yusuke (David) Sena v The Queen
Case number
SC 60/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 232(2)(b) – Judge-alone trial –Whether the High Court Judge applied the right standard of review to the applicant’s appeal against conviction.
Result
A Leave to appeal direct to this Court, against the High Court’s judgment (Sena v New Zealand Police [2017] NZHC 2319), is granted.
B The approved ground of appeal is whether the High Court was correct to dismiss Mr Sena’s appeal against conviction brought under s 232(2)(b) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011.  
10 October 2018 
__________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The convictions of the appellant are quashed.
C We direct a new trial.
24 May 2019
Transcripts
Media Releases
District Court decision
Not publicly available
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Case name
David Keith Silby v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 6/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Criminal Procedure Act 2011, s 237 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining leave to bring a second appeal against conviction and sentence in respect of offences under the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 7 April 2017
Case name
Nicholas David Wright v Vijay Bhosale and Attorney-General 
Case number
SC 8/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, ss 21, 23 and 24(a) –Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding there was no breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its assessment of the intention required to obtain exemplary damages.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondent. 9 May 2017
Case name
Mark David Chisnall v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections
Case number
SC 13/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Public Safety (Public Protections Orders) Act 2014, s 8 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in the formulation of a threshold test for the granting of a public protection orders.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Chisnall v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2016] NZCA 620).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicant’s appeal to that Court.
13 April 2017
______________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order as to costs.
1 August  2017
Case name
Midgen Enterprises Limited and David James Midgen v Water Guard NZ Limited
Case number
SC 32/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the costs award of the High Court.
Result
A  The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants are to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
9 May 2017
Case name
David Stanley Tranter v The Queen 
Case number
SC 35/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the applicant’s conviction(s) – Whether there were sufficient grounds to impose a sentence of preventive detention.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
12 December 2017
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
David Charles Browne and David Browne Contractors Limited and David Browne Mechanical Limited v David Ross Petterson as liquidator of Polyethylene Pipe Systems Limited (in liquidation)
Case number
SC 57/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to, and appreciation of, the evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of ss 295(a), 299(1) and 299(3) of the Companies Act 1993. [2016] NZCA 189   CA291/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal by Mr Browne is dismissed.
B Leave to appeal is granted to David Browne Contractors Ltd and David Browne Mechanical Ltd.
The approved question is whether the orders for repayment ought to have been made against them.
C Costs are reserved.
16 August 2016
____________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellants must pay the respondent costs of $30,000 plus reasonable disbursements (to be
determined by the Registrar in the absence of agreement).  We certify for two counsel.
7 August 2017
Case name
Craig Alexander Sanson and David John Bridgman v Ebert Construction Limited 
Case number
SC 68/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 2006 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the payments were not made by the insolvent company – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondent did not receive more than they would have in liquidation – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a transaction was not an insolvent transaction.
Result
A notice of abandonment having been lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.