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
Gerardus Peter van Uden v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 108/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Income Tax Act 1994, s OE 1 – Meaning of “ permanent place of abode” –Taxation of income in New Zealand while working overseas – Whether the Court of Appeal was right to dismiss the applicant’s appeal against the High Court’s decision.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
19 March 2019
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
19 March 2019
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Commercial Factors Limited v Jeffrey Philip Meltzer, Lloyd James Hayward and Arron Leslie Heath
Case number
SC 111/2018
Summary
Civil appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the appellant funder was not entitled to payment according to the terms of its litigation funding agreement with the respondents as liquidators of Blue Chip New Zealand Ltd.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay to the respondents costs of $2,500.
27 February 2019
B The applicant must pay to the respondents costs of $2,500.
27 February 2019
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Shreesh Basnyat v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 113/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing Act 2002 – Whether there are exceptional circumstances justifying a direct appeal against a decision of the High Court dismissing an appeal against a refusal to discharge the applicant without conviction.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
5 March 2019
5 March 2019
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
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
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
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
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the second respondent. 9 May 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Anna Elizabeth Osborne and Sonya Lynne Rockhouse v Worksafe New Zealand and District Court at Wellington
Case number
SC 23/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Judicial review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the first respondent had not exercised its prosecutorial discretion unlawfully or unreasonably – Whether the dismissal of charges by the second respondent was ultra vires because the Judge hearing the matter had earlier recused herself from the proceedings.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Osborne v Worksafe New Zealand [2017] NZCA 11).
B Subject to the qualification discussed at [1], the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicants’ appeal to that Court.
19 June 2017
_______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B A declaration is made that the decision of WorkSafe New Zealand to offer no evidence in the prosecution of Peter William Whittall was unlawful.
C Costs are reserved. The parties may file memoranda by 31 January 2018 if an order for costs is sought.
23 November 2017
B Subject to the qualification discussed at [1], the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicants’ appeal to that Court.
19 June 2017
_______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B A declaration is made that the decision of WorkSafe New Zealand to offer no evidence in the prosecution of Peter William Whittall was unlawful.
C Costs are reserved. The parties may file memoranda by 31 January 2018 if an order for costs is sought.
23 November 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 5 October 2017 (PDF, 241 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2017] NZSC 175 (PDF, 272 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
AN v Bupa Care Services (New Zealand) Limited
Case number
SC 24/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Habeas Corpus Act 2001 – Whether the High Court erred in finding the applicant’s detention lawful.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The application for leave to allow the publication of the applicant’s name and identifying particulars is dismissed.
C There is no order for costs. 12 April 2017 _____ The application for recall is dismissed.
1 May 2017
B The application for leave to allow the publication of the applicant’s name and identifying particulars is dismissed.
C There is no order for costs. 12 April 2017 _____ The application for recall is dismissed.
1 May 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Wellington International Airport Limited v New Zealand Airline Pilots' Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated and Director of Civil Aviation
Case number
SC 26/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Civil Aviation Rules, Part 139 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the term “practicable” in Part 139 of the Civil Aviation Rules – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its consideration of the matters that the Director of Civil Aviation may take into account.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (New Zealand Air Line Pilots' Association Industrial Union of Workers Inc v Director of Civil Aviation and Wellington International Airport Ltd [2017] NZCA 27).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the first respondent’s appeal to that Court.16 May 2017
________________________
A The appeals are dismissed.
B The Director of Civil Aviation and Wellington International Airport Limited are jointly and severally liable to pay costs of $30,000 to the New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated, plus reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary. We allow for second counsel.
21 December 2017
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the first respondent’s appeal to that Court.16 May 2017
________________________
A The appeals are dismissed.
B The Director of Civil Aviation and Wellington International Airport Limited are jointly and severally liable to pay costs of $30,000 to the New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated, plus reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary. We allow for second counsel.
21 December 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 24 - 25 August 2017 (PDF, 506 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2017] NZSC 199 (PDF, 316 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Director of Civil Aviation v New Zealand Airline Pilots' Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated and Wellington International Airport Limited
Case number
SC 30/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Civil Aviation Rules, Part 139 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the term “practicable” in Part 139 of the Civil Aviation Rules – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its consideration of the matters that the Director of Civil Aviation may take into account.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (New Zealand Air Line Pilots' Association Industrial Union of Workers Inc v Director of Civil Aviation and Wellington International Airport Ltd [2017] NZCA 27).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the first respondent’s appeal to that Court.
16 May 2017
_________________
A The appeals are dismissed.
B The Director of Civil Aviation and Wellington International Airport Limited are jointly and severally liable to pay costs of $30,000 to the New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated, plus reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary. We allow for second counsel.
21 December 2017
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the first respondent’s appeal to that Court.
16 May 2017
_________________
A The appeals are dismissed.
B The Director of Civil Aviation and Wellington International Airport Limited are jointly and severally liable to pay costs of $30,000 to the New Zealand Air Line Pilots’ Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated, plus reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary. We allow for second counsel.
21 December 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 24 - 25 August 2017 (PDF, 506 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2017] NZSC 199 (PDF, 316 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Matthew Richard Brown v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 36/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Criminal Procedure Act 2011 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining leave to bring second appeals against conviction and sentence.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
18 August 2017
18 August 2017
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 19 of 55