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
Phillip Richard Joe v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal made errors of fact in its sentencing decision – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B Leave is reserved to renew the application in the circumstances set out below at [5].
[5] The application for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed but without prejudice to the ability to file another application for leave to appeal to this Court if the recall application is dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
4 November 2019
B Leave is reserved to renew the application in the circumstances set out below at [5].
[5] The application for leave to appeal is accordingly dismissed but without prejudice to the ability to file another application for leave to appeal to this Court if the recall application is dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
4 November 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Rangitira Developments Limited v Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated
Case number
SC 100/2019
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc v Rangitira Developments Ltd [2018] NZCA 445, [2019] NZRMA 233).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was in error in setting aside the declarations made at [86] of the judgment of the High Court (Rangitira Developments Ltd v Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Ltd [2018] NZHC 146, (2018) 20 ELRNZ 312).
C There is no order as to costs.
5 November 2019
_________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
15 July 2020
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was in error in setting aside the declarations made at [86] of the judgment of the High Court (Rangitira Developments Ltd v Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Ltd [2018] NZHC 146, (2018) 20 ELRNZ 312).
C There is no order as to costs.
5 November 2019
_________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
15 July 2020
Transcripts
- Hearing date 19 May 2020 (PDF, 450 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 66 (PDF, 125 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
[2020] NZSC 66 (PDF, 150 KB)
Summary
Date of hearing
19 May 2020
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan and Ellen France JJ
Case name
Karl Teangiotau Nuku v The Queen
Case number
SC 89/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that errors at trial were not capable of affecting the outcome of the trial – Whether an extension of time to bring an application for leave to appeal should be granted.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 20 November 2018
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High/District Court Judgment
Not publicly available
Case name
Rangitira Developments Limited v Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated
Case number
SC 105/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in quashing the declarations and orders made by the High Court
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Inc v Rangitira Developments Ltd [2018] NZCA 445).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was in error in setting aside the declarations made at [86] of the judgment of the High Court (Rangitira Developments Ltd v Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Ltd [2018] NZHC 146, (2018) ELRNZ 312).
20 February 2019
________________________________________________________
A Leave to appeal is revoked.
B Costs of $6,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the respondent.
C Leave is reserved to apply again for leave to appeal if the proposed appeal is no longer moot.
26 July 2019
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was in error in setting aside the declarations made at [86] of the judgment of the High Court (Rangitira Developments Ltd v Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society Ltd [2018] NZHC 146, (2018) ELRNZ 312).
20 February 2019
________________________________________________________
A Leave to appeal is revoked.
B Costs of $6,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the respondent.
C Leave is reserved to apply again for leave to appeal if the proposed appeal is no longer moot.
26 July 2019
Transcripts
- Hearing date 8 July 2019 (PDF, 131 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 66 (PDF, 125 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Case name
Musab Hamdi v The Queen
Case number
SC 72/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 32 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial Judge’s references in summing-up remedied the prosecutor’s breach of s 32 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding there was no trial counsel error creating a miscarriage of justice at the applicant’s trial
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MUSAB HAMDI v R [2017] NZSC 134 [5 September 2017] (PDF, 89 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Lawrence Reginald Jury v The Chief Executive of the New Zealand Customs Service
Case number
SC 100/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that in an appeal under s 267 of the Customs and Excise Tax Act 1996 the burden of proof is on the appellant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the High Court Judge had made a relevant or material error as to the test of intention under s 225(1)(o) of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal exceeded its jurisdiction under s 273 of the Act.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Mrinal Sardana v The Queen
Case number
SC 41/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the jury’s verdict was not unreasonable – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no risk that outcome of trial was affected by error – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that the sentence was not manifestly excessive. [2016] NZCA 138 CA508/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
1 November 2016
1 November 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MRINAL SARDANA v R [2016] NZSC 142 1 November 2016 (PDF, 66 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Michael Brian Ogden v The Queen
Case number
SC 66/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the error made by the District Court Judge in considering a formal written statement which was on the court file but had not been admitted in evidence was not so gross, prejudicial or irremediable as to render the trial unfair. [2016] NZCA 214 CA609/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 August 2016
3 August 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MICHAEL BRIAN OGDEN v R [2016] NZSC 97 3 August 2016 (PDF, 81 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Vijendra Kumar Naiker v The Queen
Case number
SC 71/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding no error in the trial judge’s decision not to discharge the jury – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the trial judge gave an adequate reliability warning.
[2016] NZCA 250 CA562/2015
[2016] NZCA 250 CA562/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2 September 2016
2 September 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
David Obiaga v The Queen
Case number
SC 77/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no mistrial due to trial counsel error or juror ill-health – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no misuse of co-defendant’s statement – Whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding sentence. [2016] NZCA 270 CA390/2015, CA395/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
8 December 2016
8 December 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
DAVID OBIAGA v R [2016] NZSC 162 8 December 2016 (PDF, 87 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Page 2 of 16