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
Westpac New Zealand Limited v Alan John Clark
Case number
SC 67/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – Property – Mortgages – Security – Fraud – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding, in effect, that Appellant’ s mortgage secured nothing – Whether Court of Appeal erred in rejecting Appellant’s submission that upon registration of a mortgage, charged property is rendered liable for the mortgage debt (monies advanced in terms of or in reliance upon the mortgage or monies secured by the mortgage) whatever the mortgage debt is established to be by the lender – Whether Court of Appeal erred in rejecting Appellant’s submission that for purposes of determining what monies are secured by a mortgage, there is no difference between an acknowledgment contained in a mortgage of a particular sum lent with a covenant to repay that sum and an acknowledgment of an unparticularised sum (“all monies”) with a covenant to repay those monies – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that a personal covenant to pay contained in a mortgage is independent of the charged created by the mortgage and does not attract indefeasibility on registration – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that the terms of the loan agreement between the Appellant and a fraudster were not incorporated into the registered mortgage – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding Appellant suffered no loss as a result of the Respondent’s breach of undertaking to register the Appellant’ s mortgage “promptly”.[2008] NZCA 346 CA 172/06 5 September 2008
Media Releases
- sc 67 2008 westpac v alan john clark press release (PDF, 88 KB)
Substantive judgment
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is granted.
27 November 2008
Transcript
Case name
APN New Zealand Limited v Simunovich Fisheries Limited and others
Case number
SC 69/2008
Summary
Civil – Defamation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the obligation in s 38 of the Defamation Act 1992 applies to the pleading of a stand alone defence of truth – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the “repetition rule” and the “ conduct rule” apply to pleadings of truth - whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the change in approach to admissibility of hearsay evidence in the Evidence Act 2006 does not affect the applicability of the “repetition rule” to a pleading of truth – was the Court of Appeal wrong to hold that it is not open to a defendant to plead the opinions and statements of third parties in support of a truth defence, or in support of an honest opinion defence.[2008] NZCA 350 CA 447/07 CA 584/07 8 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Television New Zealand Limited v Simunovich Fisheries Limited and others
Case number
SC 70/2008
Summary
Civil – Defamation – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the repetition and conduct rules of pleading apply to a defence of truth – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that a defendant may not seek to prove the truth of imputations by reference to the opinions or assertions of others – did the Court of Appeal err in holding that s 38 does not permit third party assertions and opinion to be pleaded for the defence of truth – was the Court of Appeal wrong to find that a defendant is not entitled to rely on third party assertions as publication facts on which a defence of honest opinion is based, but must identify true statements of facts in the publication which may not include the fact that others made allegations or expressed opinions.[2008] NZCA 350 CA 447/07 CA 584/07 8 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 December 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
Costs $15,000 to the respondent jointly with one half of their disbursements.
26 August 2009
Transcript
Case name
Diagnostic Medlab Limited v Auckland District Health Board and others
Case number
SC 80/2008
Summary
Civil appeal – judicial review – the Auckland region District Health Boards (ARDHBs) put out to tender the provision of its community laboratory services – the successful tenderer was Lab Tests Auckland Limited (Lab Tests) and the incumbent provider, Diagnostic Medlab Limited (DML), applied to the High Court for judicial review of the ARDHBs’ decision on the basis that the decision was procedurally flawed – the application was successful in the High Court and but an appeal to the Court of Appeal by Lab Tests was allowed – whether the Court of Appeal failed to interpret the provisions of the New Zealand Public Health and Disability Act 2000 (PHDA) as contemplating and requiring supplementing by principles of natural justice – whether the Court of Appeal applied a wrong and unduly restrictive approach to judicial review in the context of a contracting decision for an essential public health service – whether the Court of Appeal sanctioned a result which undermined the principles of natural justice, compromised the integrity of the relevant contracting process, and eroded public trust and confidence in decision-making by DHBs generally – whether the Court of Appeal failed to recognise that the PHDA contemplates a significant community voice in decisions affecting public health, including by way of meaningful consultation in accordance with expectations established by documents required by the PHDA – whether the Court of Appeal failed to apply any or an appropriate level of scrutiny to the DHBs’ decision on the grounds of unreasonableness – whether the Court of Appeal failed to pay any or proper respect to the High Court’s identification and evaluation of the relevant factual context, and that Court’s advantages as a primary fact-finder and adjudicator of mixed questions of law and fact. [2008] NZCA 385 CA 154/07 25 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
Costs $2,5000 to the first respondents (jointly) and $2,500 to the second respondent.
Case name
Laxman Rajamani v the Queen
Case number
SC 8/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – murder – husband killed wife – defence of lack of murderous intent and provocation – husband and wife both Indian - alleged provocative act by wife was in threatening to leave her husband for a Pakistani colleague – whether trial judge erred in proceeding with the trial to verdict with only ten jurors after two jurors had been discharged – whether trial judge erred in summing up on provocation – whether defence counsel’s cross-examination of a key Crown witness was inadequate; and whether trial judge’s summing up with respect to that witness was unbalanced – whether hearsay evidence from deceased a few days before her death concerning threats to her life from the defendant should have been admitted under R v Manase [2001] 2 NZLR 197; and whether trial judge’ s instructions as to the use to which that evidence could be put were incorrect. CA 140/06 20 December 2006
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
19 April 2007
____________________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed, new trial ordered.
23 August 2007
19 April 2007
____________________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed, new trial ordered.
23 August 2007
Transcripts
- Hearing date 25 July 2007 (PDF, 321 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
RAJAMANI v R SC 8/2007 [19 April 2007] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
RAJAMANI v R SC 8/2007 [23 August 2007] (PDF, 38 KB)
Case name
New Zealand Professional Firefighters Union v New Zealand Fire Service Commission
Case number
SC 13/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – whether the Court of Appeal had jurisdiction to determine the appeal from the Employment Court – whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct test in determining whether certain days would “otherwise be working days” for an employee – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining the compliance of a collective employment agreement with the Holidays Act 1981 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the collective employment agreement – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 6 of the Holidays Act 1981. CA 270/05 21 December 2006
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted.
B The approved grounds are:
(a) Whether the Court of Appeal correctly construed the phrase “a day that would otherwise be a working day for the employee” in s 57(1)(b) of the Holidays Act 2003; and
(b) Whether the Court of Appeal was right to conclude that s 57(1)(a) does not require specific agreement between the employer and employee as to a specific day for the taking of an alternative holiday.
17 April 2007
______________________________________________________________________________________
Notice of abandonment being lodged. the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
7 August 2007
B The approved grounds are:
(a) Whether the Court of Appeal correctly construed the phrase “a day that would otherwise be a working day for the employee” in s 57(1)(b) of the Holidays Act 2003; and
(b) Whether the Court of Appeal was right to conclude that s 57(1)(a) does not require specific agreement between the employer and employee as to a specific day for the taking of an alternative holiday.
17 April 2007
______________________________________________________________________________________
Notice of abandonment being lodged. the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
7 August 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Xiao Quing Huang, Cui Yong Ming and Jarvis Cui v Minister of Immigration and The Attorney General
Case number
SC 15/2007
Summary
Civil – seeking order staying decision of High Court pending hearing of appeal in the Court of Appeal - Ms Huang and Mr Cui are Chinese nationals who came to NZ in 1996 on short-term visitor permits – married and had a son in NZ – 6-year old son is a NZ citizen – removal orders served on Ms Huang and Mr Cui in September 2005 – applied to the High Court for judicial review on humanitarian grounds – effect of removal proceedings on child – application unsuccessful – Mr Cui removed from NZ and returned to China – applicants sought interim relief from the Court of Appeal to delay removal of Ms Huang pending hearing of appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining to grant interim relief – whether Ms Huang’s appeal rights rendered nugatory if removed to China – whether balance of convenience favours applicants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that merits of intended appeal not so strong to favour the grant of interim relief –United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child - United Nations Convention on Civil and Political Rights - New Zealand Bill of Rights Act - application for leave to appeal out of time.CA 236/06 18 December 2006
Result
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 10 May 2007
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Nicola Brownwyn Hayes v The Queen
Case number
SC 16/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – Crimes Act 1961 – s 229(A)(b) (taking or dealing with certain documents with intent to defraud) – s 228 (dishonestly taking or using document) – whether, and to what extent, the Crown must prove the probability or possibility of “pecuniary advantage” where the accused uses a document to avoid the risk of losing ACC compensation payments to which she, in any event, would have been entitled – alternatively, whether, in that same scenario, the Crown must prove that the accused was no longer entitled to such payments because the relevant incapacity had ceased.CA 343/06 24 February 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
8 May 2007
_________________
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. New trial ordered.
15 February 2008
8 May 2007
_________________
Appeal allowed. Conviction set aside. New trial ordered.
15 February 2008
Transcripts
- Hearing date 15 August 2007 (PDF, 273 KB)
Media Releases
- pressrelease hayes 000 (PDF, 89 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
HAYES V R SC 16/2007 [15 February 2008] (PDF, 95 KB)
Case name
Samuel Tahatu Marsh v The Queen
Case number
SC 19/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – applicant convicted of discharging an airgun in or near a dwellinghouse or public place (s 48 Arms Act 1983) – whether leave should be granted on a direct appeal from the High Court under s 14 Supreme Court Act 2003 – whether Police search of private bedroom was an unreasonable search and seizure contrary to s 21 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, where the Bill of Rights issue was not raised in the Courts below – application for leave to appeal out of time. CRI 2006 419 90 21 November 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
25 June 2007
25 June 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MARSH v NEW ZEALAND POLICE SC 19/2007 [25 June 2007] (PDF, 15 KB)
Case name
Waitara Leaseholders Association Inc v New Plymouth District Council
Case number
SC 23/2007
Summary
Civil –Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that land was not held on a charitable trust and that the Council was not subject to the obligations of charitable trustees – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the Council was not obliged to consider the objects of the statutory trusts when deciding to seek legislation to remove trust restrictions – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that compliance with section 14(6) of the Trustee Act 1956 relieves a trustee from its obligation of obtaining the best price for an asset – whether the Supreme Court should grant leave to pursue a new ground, namely that the Council failed to take into account the fact that its decisions were contrary to previous promises and assurances that it had made.CA 259/05 CA 260/05 20 March 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs $2,500 to the respondent.
20 June 2007
20 June 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Page 47 of 55