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
A R Poynter v The Commerce Commission
Case number
SC 32/2009
Summary
Civil – Commerce Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 4 is not an exhaustive statement of the circumstances in which the provisions of the Act apply to overseas conduct – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the conduct of another foreign resident who acted in New Zealand could be attributed to the Appellant so as to treat the Appellant as having acted within New Zealand through that other person – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly imported the jurisdictional reach of conspiracy in s 310 of the Crimes Act 1961 into s 80(1)(f) of the Act.[2009] NZCA 84 CA 257/2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
16 June 2009
16 June 2009
Media Releases
- press release poynter 16 april 2010 (PDF, 37 KB)
Substantive judgment
POYNTER v COMMERCE COMMISSION SC 32/2009 [16 April 2010] (PDF, 265 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
AKLE v COMMERCE COMMISSION SC 30/2009 [16 June 2009] (PDF, 12 KB)
Transcript
Hearing date : 17 November 2009
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath and Wilson JJ.
Case name
Leroy John Barr v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 34/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – whether jurisdiction to order the payment of medical expenses incurred by the Police in administering a blood test against persons convicted of driving with excess blood alcohol. [2009] NZCA 124 CA 700/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
16 June 2009
______________________
Appeal allowed. The order for payment of medical expenses of $102.60 is set aside. Insubstitution, the appellant is ordered to pay $93 towards medical expenses.
21 October 2009
16 June 2009
______________________
Appeal allowed. The order for payment of medical expenses of $102.60 is set aside. Insubstitution, the appellant is ordered to pay $93 towards medical expenses.
21 October 2009
Media Releases
- media barr v nz police (PDF, 39 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Blanchard. Tipping, McGrath, Wilson, and Anderson JJ
Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Department of Corrections and another.
Case number
SC 35/2009
Summary
Civil – Disciplinary proceedings - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the decision of the Hearing Adjudicator to refer a charge to a Visiting Justice was not subject to s 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly found the decision of the Hearing Adjudicator did not breach natural justice – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 134 of the Corrections Act 2004 does not require a Hearing Adjudicator to provide notice to a prisoner that his or her charge is being referred to a Visiting Justice, or to allow the prisoner the opportunity to be heard on that referral – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Hearing Adjudicator had not taken into account irrelevant circumstances – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that s 134(2)(a) of the Corrections Act does not exclude consideration of a prisoner’ s past disciplinary record.[2009] NZCA 129 CA 318/2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
24 July 2009
24 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Shane Charles Wenzel v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against decision of District Court Judge ordering trial by Judge alone under s 361D of the Crimes Act 1961 – Whether the incorporation into s 361D(3)(b) of an accused’s right to trial by jury requires an assessment of the weight of an accused’s right to jury trial in the circumstances of the case and the potential length of any sentence that might be imposed on conviction – Whether the s 361D limit on an accused’s right to jury trial can be demonstratively justified under s 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. [2009] NZCA 130 CA 31/2009 8 April 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 9 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WENZEL V R SC 38/2009 9 June 2009 (PDF, 14 KB)
Case name
Tasman Orient Line CV v New Zealand China Clays Limited and others
Case number
SC 39/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – application of the Protocol to Amend the International Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to Bills of Lading (“the Hague-Visby Rules”) to a grounding of a ship owned by the appellant – whether by reason of the conduct of the master of the vessel the appellant is not entitled to rely on the protection of Article IV Rule 2(a) – whether the Hague-Visby Rules depart from the prior common law – whether the history behind the Hague-Visby Rules is relevant to interpretation – whether the interpretation of Article IV Rule 2(a) should have regard to the factual context – whether the factual context warrants an interpretation of Article IV Rule 2(a) that results in the appellant being liable – whether an interpretation of Article IV Rule 2(a) which results in the appellant being liable is consistent with purpose and policy of the Hague-Visby Rules – whether an interpretation of Article IV Rule 2(a) which results in the appellant being liable is consistent with Article III Rule 2[2009] NZCA 135 CA 519/2007 9 April 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 July 2009
1 July 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 28 October 2009 (PDF, 895 KB)
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 41/2009
Summary
Civil – Judicial Review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that as the Appellant was not a participant in the statutory scheme under review the Appellant did not possess public interest standing to review the identified pleaded decisions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that s 27(1) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 has no application to decision making under the Official Information Act 1982CIV 2006 – 485-2161 20 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused. Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent.
3 June 2009
3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Solicitor-General
Case number
SC 48/2009
Summary
Civil/Criminal Appeal – Offences – Contempt of Court – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Appeal against decision committing appellant to prison for contempt – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding contempt proceedings civil in nature – Whether appellant wrongly denied opportunity to elect trial by jury.[2009] NZCA 62 CA 447/2008 9 March 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
7 August 2009
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the order made by the Court of Appeal is quashed. It is replaced by an order committing the appellant to prison for a term of a maximum of three months, subject to the proviso that the term of imprisonment will come to an immediate end if the appellant complies with the injunction issued on 5 May 2005 and made permanent on 23 December 2008 by the High Court at Auckland in the proceeding Korda Mentha v Siemer HC Auckland CIV-2005-404-1808, 23 December 2008 and if he also provides an undertaking to the High Court in a form approved by the High Court that he and Paragon Oil Services Ltd will continue to comply with that injunction for so long as it remains in force. Mr Siemer is ordered to surrender to his bail at the High Court in Auckland no later than 4pm on 20 May 2010 unless by then he has complied with the injunction and provided that undertaking to the High Court in a form approved by it.
17 May 2010
____________________________
Application for recall of judgment dismissed.
11 June 2010
_____________________________
Further application for recall of judgment dismissed.
15 June 2010
7 August 2009
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the order made by the Court of Appeal is quashed. It is replaced by an order committing the appellant to prison for a term of a maximum of three months, subject to the proviso that the term of imprisonment will come to an immediate end if the appellant complies with the injunction issued on 5 May 2005 and made permanent on 23 December 2008 by the High Court at Auckland in the proceeding Korda Mentha v Siemer HC Auckland CIV-2005-404-1808, 23 December 2008 and if he also provides an undertaking to the High Court in a form approved by the High Court that he and Paragon Oil Services Ltd will continue to comply with that injunction for so long as it remains in force. Mr Siemer is ordered to surrender to his bail at the High Court in Auckland no later than 4pm on 20 May 2010 unless by then he has complied with the injunction and provided that undertaking to the High Court in a form approved by it.
17 May 2010
____________________________
Application for recall of judgment dismissed.
11 June 2010
_____________________________
Further application for recall of judgment dismissed.
15 June 2010
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
SIEMER v SOLICITOR-GENERAL SC 48/2009 [17 May 2010] (PDF, 159 KB)
Transcript
Hearing date : recusal 26 February 2017
Elias CJ, Blanchard, McGrath, Wilson, Anderson JJ
Case Number
SC 48/2009
Case name
Penelope Mary Bright v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 51/2009
Summary
Criminal – Trespass Act 1980 – appellant arrested and charged with the offence of trespass under ss 3(1) and 11(2)(a) of the Trespass Act following refusal to leave a Council meeting when asked to do so – appellant subsequently convicted in the District Court – whether the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act 1987 negates the Trespass Act since removal of a person under s 50 of the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act is a complete remedy in itself – whether the minimum threshold for convicting under the Trespass Act was not met because the appellant was never warned for trespass before being charged and convicted.[2009] NZCA 187 CA 796/2008 15 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 6 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BRIGHT V NEW ZEALAND POLICE SC 51/2009 6 August 2009 (PDF, 14 KB)
Case name
Wyeth (NZ) Limited v Ancare New Zealand Limited and The Environmental Risk Management Authority
Case number
SC 57/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal - Statutory Interpretation - whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996; whether the Act requires or entitles the Environmental Risk Management Authority to refuse to disclose the identity of a hazardous substance and/or its chemical composition; whether the Act allows the Environmental Risk Management Authority to require that the identity of a hazardous substance and/or its chemical composition be provided on the basis of confidentiality undertakings. [2009] NZCA 211 CA 424/2007 27 May 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
25 September 2009
______________________
The appeal is dismissed with no order for costs.
23 April 2010
25 September 2009
______________________
The appeal is dismissed with no order for costs.
23 April 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 8 February 2010 (PDF, 600 KB)
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Slawomir Ryszard Bujak v The District Court at Christchurch and The Republic of Poland
Case number
SC 64/2009
Summary
Civil – extradition - whether Court of Appeal erred in refusing to admit new evidence – whether Court of Appeal erred in determining that by joining an extradition Treaty New Zealand has accepted that the court system in the partner state is robust enough to grant a fair trial – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that comity interest must be balanced against, and could somehow trump, an individual’s liberty rights – whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that the ‘ copies’ provided by the second respondent sufficed for extradition from New Zealand purposes – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the requisite authentication procedures were followed and that the evidence against the Appellant was not hearsay – whether the Court of Appeal failed to consider relevant case law provided by counsel. [2009] NZCA 257 CA 678/2008 19 June 2009.
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Any application for costs to be made within 10 working days.
15 September 2009
________________
Order for costs to the 2nd respondent in the sum of $2,000.
15 October 2009
15 September 2009
________________
Order for costs to the 2nd respondent in the sum of $2,000.
15 October 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Additional document
Page 42 of 55