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.
17 August 2026
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 128 KB)
All years
Case name
Garry Maui Isherwood v The Queen
Case number
SC 115/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Administering a Class B drug and sexual violation – Whether miscarriage of justice – Incompetence of trial counsel – Whether Court should admit new evidence.CA 182/2004 14 March 2005
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 9 February 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Isherwood v R SC 115/2009 [9 February 2010] (PDF, 10 KB)
Case name
Matthew John Birchler v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 116/2009
Summary
Criminal – appeal directly from the High Court under s 144A(1)(a) of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – intended appeal against the determination of the High Court by way of case stated under s 107 of the Summary Proceedings Act – whether direct appeal to the Supreme Court appropriate given that the Court of Appeal has previously refused leave to appeal on this point on the basis that there were no grounds for challenge to the well established interpretation of s 108 of the Summary Proceedings Act in Davis v Mingins (HC, Rot, AP 48/91, 30/10/91, Fisher J). CRI 2009 485 83 25 November 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 March 2010
_____________________________
Appeal allowed. Order made in the High Court remitting the matter for consideration in the District Court is quashed.
Reasons to be given later.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
The Attorney-General of New Zealand v Mervyn Chapman
Case number
SC 120/2009
Summary
Civil – Crown liability for judicial breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by holding that the Attorney-General is the correct defendant in an action alleging breaches of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 by a Registrar and judges of the Court of Appeal – If not, whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by holding that the Attorney-General is not entitled to the same immunities as the person who committed the alleged breaches.[2009] NZCA 552 CA 245/2008 25 November 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. The approved ground is whether Bill of Rights damages can be ordered against the Attorney-General on behalf of the Crown for breach of fair trial rights by judicial conduct in respect of which the judicial officer is immune from liability.
31 March 2010
31 March 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 December 2010 SC 120/2009 (PDF, 782 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2011] NZSC 110 (PDF, 108 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
John Bevan-Smith v Raupo Publishing (NZ) Limited
Case number
SC 2/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – breach of contract – book publication - whether Court of Appeal should have granted extension of time to file case on appeal – whether agreement between applicant and defendant void because of deceptive conduct – whether the defendant breached due diligence obligations in contract - whether the Court received misleading evidence regarding the motive’ s of the defendant – whether High Court made correct findings of fact especially regarding timing of events – whether the Court of Appeal should have reconsidered findings of fact made by the High Court – whether High Court correctly interpreted relevant clauses in contract –whether quantum of lost book sales correctly calculated – whether case should be remitted to the Court of Appeal to be reheard or to the High Court for a new trial.[2007] NZCA 579 CA 57/07 14 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $1,500 to the respondent.
9 April 2008
Case name
Matini Vaihu v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 3/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act – Breach – Remedies – Damages – Torture or cruel or degrading or disproportionately severe treatment – Kidney dialysis patient, V, bitten by Police dog – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding bite inadvertent, not deliberate and lawful, so as to relieve Attorney-General of liability for actions of Police dog under control of handler – Whether bite of innocent bystander by Police dog under control of handler constitutes breach of s 9.[2007] NZCA 574 CA 180/06 13 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
7 April 2008
7 April 2008
Case name
Elders New Zealand Limited v PGG Wrightson Lmited
Case number
SC 7/2008
Summary
Civil – Contract Law – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that an amalgamation approved under Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993 has the legal consequences provided for in s 219 of that Act – Whether an amalgamating company is entitled to “pick and choose” between Part 13 and Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993 – Whether the terms of the amalgamation order created the effect prescribed in Part 13 even though the order was made pursuant to Part 15 – Whether the applicant was bound by the Part 15 order although the order did not state that the applicant was bound.[2007] NZCA 596 CA 277/06 21 December 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 April 2008
_______________________
Appeal dismissed.Costs to respondent $15,000, together with reasonable disbursements.
5 December 2008
18 April 2008
_______________________
Appeal dismissed.Costs to respondent $15,000, together with reasonable disbursements.
5 December 2008
Media Releases
- sc 7 elders nz ltd v pggwrightson ltd press release (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
New Zealand Exchange Limited v Bank of New Zealand, Access Brokerage Limited (in liquidation) and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
Case number
SC 13/2008
Summary
Civil – appeal from strike-out application – second respondent in liquidation, first and third respondents brought actions against NZX in contract and tort - whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that NZX owes personal duties of care to individual clients or to individual brokers, to protect each of them from economic loss due to broker’s dishonesty or negligence in relation to client funds held on trust – whether the Court of Appeal was right to find that the breach of such a duty (if owed) is sufficiently legally causative of loss – whether the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that the Securities Commission is the “primary regulator” of the New Zealand Stock Exchange, and not NZX.2008] NZCA 25 CA236/06 22 February 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Transcript
Case name
Ahmad Zanzoul v The Queen
Case number
SC 17/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – applicant convicted after pleading guilty pursuant to s 153A of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 on an information laid under s 31(1)(f)(ii) of the Passports Act 1992 – sentenced to 15 months imprisonment with leave to apply for home detention – whether the conviction and sentence is a nullity for want of legal certainty or vagueness of the provisions dealing with the indictable and summary jurisdiction for penalty purposes – alternatively, whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by constructing the legislation to the applicant’s detriment in failing to apply the lesser penalty where the legislation was “complex and confusing” – additionally, whether admissions were obtained without informing the applicant of his rights not to incriminate himself, to silence, and to obtain a lawyer in breach of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether, under art 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations read in conjunction with the Refugee Convention, the applicant should, as a refugee claimant, have been provided on detainment with advice by a consular or appropriate international official – whether a Hansen declaration should be made with regard to this issue – whether the applicant’s hearing before the Refugee Status Appeals Authority was unlawful for lack of independence and impartiality on the principles of Charanjit Singh v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] ScotCS 342 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in fact and law in finding and taking into account that there is nothing linking the appellant’s possession of a false Australian passport with his claim for refugee status – whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in taking into account that the applicant was not in the situation of many refugee claimants – application for name suppression.CA 297/06 6 December 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ZANZOUL v R SC 17/2008 [10 June 2008] (PDF, 25 KB)
Additional document
ZANZOUL v R SC 17/2008 [9 May 2008] (PDF, 14 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
10 June 2008
Case name
Shaun Antony King v The Queen
Case number
SC 18/2008
Summary
Criminal – appeal by way of case stated – Juries Act 1981 – applicant challenges the legality and fairness of jury-vetting, under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Privacy Act 1993 and the Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 – whether controls should operate over prosecution use of information including, but not limited to, the criminal history of a potential jury member – whether disclosure by the prosecution to the defence should be required in relation to such information.[2008] NZCA 79 CA 207/2007 10 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave granted
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [25 July 2008] (PDF, 48 KB)
Transcript
Case name
Deborah Gordon-Smith v The Queen
Case number
SC 32/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal by way of case stated – Juries Act 1981 – Challenge under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, Privacy Act 1993 and Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 to legality and fairness of jury-vetting by Police so as to provide Prosecutor with information including, but not limited to, non-disqualifying criminal histories of persons on jury list – Jurisdiction – Leave on same grounds as King v R (SC 18/2008) sought – Jurisdiction issue relevant to King case sole reason for application for leave and to be included as a party to King case.[2008] NZCA 79 CA 207/2007 10 April 2008
Media Releases
- media release gordon smith (PDF, 87 KB)
Substantive judgment
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [23 March 2009] (PDF, 108 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
GORDON-SMITH v R SC 32/2008 [25 July 2008] (PDF, 48 KB)
Dates
25 July 2008 – Application for leave to appeal granted.
______________________
Appeal dismissed.
23 March 2009
Transcription
Hearing date : 3 December 2008
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Wilson JJ.
Page 45 of 55