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
Mark Stephen Hotchin v The New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Limited and Perpetual Trust Limited
Case number
SC 92/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that it is necessary for both tortfeasors to have a coordinate liability to the plaintiff on a claim for contribution against a co-tortfeasor under s 17(1)(c) of the Law Reform Act 1936 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the same contribution principles apply to both tort and equity – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that it was unarguable that the applicant and the respondents are potentially liable for the same damage suffered by investors – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant’s claim for equitable contribution is unarguable.[2014] NZCA 400 CA 494/2013
Result
A The application to appeal is granted (Hotchin v The New Zealand Guardian Trust Company Limited [2014] NZCA 400).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to uphold the striking out of Mr Hotchin’s third party claims against the respondents.
30 October 2014
_________________
A. The appeal is allowed.
B. Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the appellant. We certify for second counsel.
C. The costs orders in the High Court and the Court of Appeal are set aside.15 March 2016
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to uphold the striking out of Mr Hotchin’s third party claims against the respondents.
30 October 2014
_________________
A. The appeal is allowed.
B. Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the appellant. We certify for second counsel.
C. The costs orders in the High Court and the Court of Appeal are set aside.15 March 2016
Transcripts
- Hearing date 26 March 2015 (PDF, 561 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2016] NZSC 24 (PDF, 405 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Wilson Parking New Zealand Limited v Fanshawe 136 Limited, 136 Fanshawe Limited and Fanshawe Capital Limited
Case number
SC 98/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the approach adopted by Court of Appeal in determining the appropriate remedy in cases where an equitable estoppel was wrong in law – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining the appropriate remedy in this case.[2014] NZCA 407 CA 24/2012
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
1 December 2014
The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
1 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Elvis Heremia Teddy v New Zealand Poice
Case number
SC 101/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Maritime Transport Act 1994 – Crimes Act 1961 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that s 65 of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 applied extraterritorially to New Zealand ships – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the arrest powers in the Crimes Act 1961 empower the New Zealand Police to stop and board New Zealand ships and to arrest offenders extraterritorially.[2014] NZCA 422 CA 614/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
17 February 2015
17 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter Guy Goodricke v The Queen
Case number
SC 111/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the procedure on appeal complied with the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 and New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.CRI 2010-485-26
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
5 December 2014
Case name
Razdan Rafiq v Commissioner of New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 113/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal Judge erred in refusing to dispense with security for costs.[2014] NZCA 500 CA 495/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
10 December 2014
10 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
The Queen v Shivneel Shahil Kumar
Case number
SC 115/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence – Right to refrain from making a statement under s 23(4) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether admissions made to undercover police officers in holding cell after applicant arrested were actively elicited – Whether evidence obtained in consequence of a breach of ss 23(4) and 24(c) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act – Whether evidence obtained unfairly – Whether exclusion of evidence was proportionate to the Police impropriety. [2014] NZCA 489 CA 86/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted ([2014] NZCA 489).
19 November 2014
______________________
The appeal is dismissed.
6 August 2015
19 November 2014
______________________
The appeal is dismissed.
6 August 2015
Case name
Razdan Rafiq v Commissioner of New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 116/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal Judge erred in refusing to dispense with security for costs.[2014] NZCA 492 CA 249/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondent. 16 February 2015
Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondent. 16 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Patrick Dean Norris v Bruce Donald Gemmell and Rhys James Cain
Case number
SC 119/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993, ss 255 and 283 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by ignoring the requirements of s 255(2)(b) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by misdirecting themselves on the statutory purpose and the natural wording of s 283(2) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that liquidators appointed pursuant to s 283 are not required to advise the Registrar of their appointment – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that a liquidator’s statutory ability to act as liquidator does not commence immediately on appointment as has been long held in law – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that pursuant to s 283(2) if the person who wishes to resign is not currently the liquidator there can be no resignation and no new appointment – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that there was a vacancy when Messrs Gemmell and Cain were appointed by the Official Assignee – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that the Official Assignee was able to arbitrarily remove and replace a statutorily appointed and properly acting liquidator – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that Mr Churchill was never validly appointed – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not allowing leave to adduce certain new evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their approach to costs.[2014] NZCA 490 CA 857/2012
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant is to pay the respondents costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
19 December 2014
The applicant is to pay the respondents costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar.
19 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Razdan Rafiq v The Secretary for the Department of Internal Affairs of New Zealand, The Director of the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand, The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment, The Commissioner of Police, the
Case number
SC 121/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to dispense with security for costs – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not granting a stay of proceedings[2014] NZCA 518
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondent.
20 February 2015
Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondent.
20 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Razdan Rafiq v The Director of the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand
Case number
SC 122/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to dispense with security for costs.[2014] NZCA 519
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
28 November 2014
28 November 2014
Page 27 of 55