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
D A Constable Syndicate 386 v Auckland District Law Society
Case number
SC 65/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – contractual interpretation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of an indemnity clause in the Auckland District Law Society’s standard professional indemnity policy, namely whether the word “negligent” should be read as qualifying only the word “act” in the phrase “negligent act, error or omission” .[2010] NZCA 237 CA 565/2008 8 June 2010
Result
Notice of Abandonment being filed, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
Dates
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
The approved ground of appeal is whether the word “negligent” qualifies the words “error or omission” in the indemnity clause.
8 September 2010.
Case name
Ratima James O'Donnell @ Ratima Joseph Osborne v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether guilty plea was entered in error causing a miscarriage of justice.[2010] NZCA 372 CA 179/2008 16 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
10 November 2010
Case name
Shaun Mihaka Sullivan v The Queen
Case number
SC 94/2010
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – applicant convicted of murder in the High Court and sentenced to life imprisonment – after the jury had retired and following legal argument, the trial Judge called the jury back to give some redirections – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge’s directions to the jury regarding out-of-court statements of the applicant’s co-accused did not give rise to a miscarriage of justice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the redirections by the trial Judge safely dealt with any initial errors – whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to recall its judgment dismissing the appeal on the basis that there were no exceptional circumstances and the interests of justice did not require it.[2010] NZCA 407 CA 129/2010 7 September 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SULLIVAN v R SC 94/2010 [9 December 2010] (PDF, 55 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
9 December 2010
Case name
Bostik New Zealand Limited v Stephen Graham Lockwood & Wadham Goodman Trustees Limited as trustees of the Island Trust.
Case number
SC 102/2010
Summary
Civil – Negligent misstatement – Respondent alleges misrepresentation in respect of waterproofing product suitability to waterproof large deck – Whether Court of Appeal erred in disturbing findings of fact in High Court as to falsity of representation and suitability of product and in remitting proceeding to High Court for reconsideration – Whether Court of Appeal gave undue weight to Bostik’s own technical literature regarding suitability of waterproofing product which post-dated the events in issue.[2010] NZCA 436 CA 381/2009 24 September 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $2,500 to the respondents.
8 December 2010
Case name
Peter Muller v The Queen
Case number
SC 104/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s application to adduce fresh alibi evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the admission of identification evidence at trial, while in error, did not amount to a miscarriage of justice requiring the setting aside of the verdict – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that no miscarriage of justice arose from the failure to grant a stay due to delay[2010] NZCA 380 CA 439/2009 18 August 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MULLER v R SC 104/2010 [16 D ecember 2010 (PDF, 53 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
16 December 2010.
Case name
Graham Ashley Robert Palmer v The Queen
Case number
SC 119/2010
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction for dishonest use of a GST return – whether the conduct of the investigation and criminal prosecution of the applicant was in breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 30 of the Sentencing Act 2002 and the Judges’ Rules – whether the trial Judge misdirected the jury as to the identity of a witness – whether the trial Judge erred in his summing up to the jury – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to take into account evidence produced by the applicant as to the value of goods – whether there has been error in the calculation of the period for which the applicant is subject to release conditions following his sentence of imprisonment[2010] NZCA 53 CA 349/2009 5 March 2010
Case name
Christopher Ian Freakley v The Queen
Case number
SC 126/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against sentence – whether the sentencing judge should have taken into account the fact the applicant was found not guilty on a count of aggravated robbery.[2010] NZCA 497 CA 26/2010 29 October 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FREAKLEY v R SC 126/2010 [7 March 2011] (PDF, 45 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
7 March 2011.
Case name
TFAC Limited, Geoffrey Alan Grisdale and Amanda May Grisdale v Susan Elizabeth David and UAR Limited
Case number
SC 26/2009
Summary
Civil – Fair Trading Act 1986 – Australian home services franchising operation – Applicants entered into a master franchise agreement covering Auckland’s eastern suburbs with the respondents, who owned the New Zealand master franchise – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in fact and law in its finding that the respondents did not engage in misleading and deceptive conduct in breach of s 9 of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overlooking the High Court’s finding that the respondents had breached s 22(1) and (2) of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in treating a particular pleaded misrepresentation as a misrepresentation as to a future matter – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a particular opinion was honestly held by the first respondent and had a reasonable basis – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its finding that even if the respondents had engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct the causal link necessary to justify relief under s 43 of the Act was doubtful – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its finding that the respondents were protected from liability by various disclaimer and acknowledgement clauses.[2009] NZCA 44 CA 26/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed, with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
26 May 2009
26 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
K v The Queen
Case number
SC 68/2009
Summary
Criminal – Sexual Offending – Rape – Evidence – Admissibility – recent complaint and hearsay evidence – Appeal against conviction – Whether substantial miscarriage of justice established – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding (1) that the trial Judge’ s directions on admissible evidence were adequate; (2) that there was sufficient evidence of penetration; (3) That the evidence of the complainant’s sister was not inadmissible recent complaint evidence; (4) That expert evidence relating to a summary of facts was inconsequential; (5) That it was unnecessary for the trial Judge to give a reliability direction in light of the evidence of intoxication; (6) that the trial Judge correctly ruled on the inadmissibility of two recorded telephone calls.[2009] NZCA 307 CA 664 /2008 16 July 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 20 October 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
K (CA 644/2008) V R SC 68/2009 20 October 2009 (PDF, 43 KB)
Case name
Totara Investment Limited v Crismac Limited and Ulster Limited
Case number
SC 75/2009
Summary
Civil – Interpretation of a mortgage - Whether the Court of Appeal erred as a matter of fact and law in finding that cl 9.1(d) of the mortgage did not authorise the lender to obtain security over additional property.[2009] NZCA 369 CA 599/2008 21 August 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
21 October 2009
______________________
tbc
21 October 2009
______________________
tbc
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, McGrath, Wilson, Anderson JJ.
Page 10 of 16