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
Shane Edward Williams v The Queen
Case number
SC 61/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against conviction – conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine – section 25(b) New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether High Court Judge should have stayed the criminal proceedings after making finding of undue delay in bringing the applicant to trial – stay granted in relation to eight co-accused – whether applicant should have received same remedy.[2008] NZCA 296 CA 664/2007 12 August 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
3 November 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
15 May 2009
3 November 2008
________________________
Appeal dismissed.
15 May 2009
Media Releases
- williams press release (PDF, 78 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
WILLIAMS v R SC 61/2008 [3 November 2008] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
SHANE EDWARD WILLIAMS v R SC 61/2008 [15 May 2009] (PDF, 48 KB)
Transcript
Case name
James Hemi Biddle v The Queen
Case number
SC 82/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Robbery – Criminal Procedure – Judge’s summing up – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up to jury on issues of credibility and reliability was appropriate – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up did not give rise to miscarriage of justice.[2008] NZCA 398 CA 243/2008 30 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BIDDLE v R SC 82/2008 [5 December 2008] (PDF, 13 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal refused.
5 December 2008.
Hearing
7 July 2009
Result
Appeal dismissed.
16 July 2009
Case name
James Michael Leuluaiali’i v The Queen
Case number
SC 1/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – appellant convicted as party to attempted murder and murder – appeal by a co-accused had been allowed on grounds of error in summing up in relation to parties; like errors in present case – appeal allowed in relation to attempted murder – in relation to murder the proviso to s 385(1) applied and appeal dismissed – whether application of the proviso led to a substantial miscarriage of justice. CA 122/06 22 November 2006
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 30 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LEULUAIALI'L v R SC 1/2007 [30 March 2007] (PDF, 16 KB)
Case name
John Donald Currie v The Queen
Case number
SC 7/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act.CA 473/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. Application for leave to cross appeal dismissed.
29 May 2007
_________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
In Supreme Court, reasonable expenses as may be fixed by the Registrar.
14 November 2007
29 May 2007
_________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
In Supreme Court, reasonable expenses as may be fixed by the Registrar.
14 November 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Substantive judgment / Media release
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Case name
James Arthur Rose v Karen Diane Rose
Case number
SC 73/2007
Summary
Civil – Property (Relationships) Act 1976 – whether a partnership interest is an asset for the purposes of the Act – whether improvements to land that is relationship property form part of that land by operation of Land Transfer Act 1952 definition of “land” – whether increases in value to property caused by inflation are within the scope of claims under s 9A(1) or 9A(2) – whether s 9A(2) claim required evidence of an action by the respondent that had the effect of increasing the value of the property – whether s 2G requires assets and liabilities to be valued at the same date. [2007] NZCA 406 CA 212/06 11 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
6 December 2007
___________________________
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
19 May 2009
6 December 2007
___________________________
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
19 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave granted
ROSE V ROSE SC 73/2007 [6 December 2007] (PDF, 14 KB)
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
Phillip Hans Field v Malcolm James Burgess
Case number
SC 87/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – sentencing – Court of Appeal quashed the sentence of six and a half years imposed by the District Court judge and replaced it with a sentence of eight years – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to increase the sentence imposed in the District Court – in particular, whether courts are obliged to accept eight years as the starting point in cases of sexual violation by rape – whether a guilty plea made after the complainant has given evidence is necessarily less worthy than a guilty plea that spares the complainant the need to give evidence – whether a guilty plea entered part way through trial by one accused is of assistance to the Crown with respect to bolstering the credibility of the complainant’ s evidence – whether the trial judge has an unfettered right to enter a merciful sentence – whether the Court of Appeal made material factual errors – whether the Court of Appeal’s approach has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.[2007] NZCA 550 CA 511/07 29 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 17 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FIELD v BURGESS SC 87/2007 [17 December 2007] (PDF, 16 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Joseph Junior Sipa v The Queen
Case number
SC 4/2006
Summary
Criminal law - appeal from Court of Appeal decision on Solicitor-General appeal against sentence for injuring with intent to injure - whether Court of Appeal erred in allowing appeals by Solicitor-General and substituting a sentence of three and a half years' imprisonment - approach when accused relies on sentencing indication given to co-offender - appellant entered guilty plea on the basis of sentencing indication given to his co-offender (his de facto partner) - whether the Court of Appeal should have remitted the case to the District Court for re-sentencing in light of its decision in R v Edwards . CA 390/05 7 December 2005
Result
Leave to Appeal granted.
28 March 2006
____________________________
Appeal dismissed.
20 July 2006
28 March 2006
____________________________
Appeal dismissed.
20 July 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
SIPA And Anor V R SC 4/2006 [28 March 2006] (PDF, 14 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
Tess Jean Edwards v The Queen
Case number
SC 5/2006
Summary
Criminal law - appeal from Court of Appeal decision on Solicitor-General appeal against sentence for injuring with intent to injure - whether Court of Appeal erred in refusing to vacate guilty plea - whether Court of Appeal erred in allowing appeals by Solicitor-General and substituting a sentence of three and a half years' imprisonment - whether the Court of Appeal should have remitted the case to the District Court to allow the appellant to reconsider her guilty plea in light of its decision that the sentencing Judge misinformed himself in light of the Court of Appeal's decision in Taueki . CA 390/05 7 December 2005
Result
Leave to Appeal granted.
28 March 2006
_________________
20 July 2006.
Appeal dismissed.
28 March 2006
_________________
20 July 2006.
Appeal dismissed.
Judgment appealed from
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Trustee Executors Limited v Peter James Murray and others and Morel & Co Ltd and Jennifer Ann Morel
Case number
SC 15/2006
Summary
Civil - allotment of participatory securities - 'payment' of minimum amount within 4 months of registered prospectus - whether the tender and acceptance of a cheque on terms that it be held and its value offset against the amount payable to its drawer on settlement can "be deemed to have been paid" within the meaning of Securities Act 1978, s 37(2)(a) - whether statutory supervisor owes common law duty of care in addition to duty to exercise reasonable diligence imposed by statutory implication and Deed of Participation - whether a duty as trustee of funds received pursuant to an offer of securities can be imposed in addition to an express duty as statutory supervisor - whether exclusion clause in Deed of Participation can exclude liability except for breach of the statutory implied duty to exercise reasonable diligence - whether negligent or inadvertent breach of trust can amount to (equitable) fraud for the purposes of Limitation Act 1950, s 28. CA 86/04 22 December 2005
Result
4 April 2006 – Leave to Appeal granted
Transcripts
- Hearing date 21 and 22 Nov 2006 SC 15/2006 (PDF, 485 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 27 (PDF, 159 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter James Murray and others and Morel & Co Ltd and Jennifer Ann Morel
Case number
SC 17/2006
Summary
Civil - allotment of participatory securities - numerous causes of actions brought against respondents alleging, among other things, an allotment in breach of Securities Act 1978, s 37(2), and issuing a prospectus containing untrue statements in breach of Securities Act 1978, s 56 - causes of action struck out as an abuse of process, being time barred pursuant to the Limitation Act 1950 - whether the doctrine of “reasonable discoverability” should apply to all causes of action. CA 86/04 22 December 2005
Result
4 April 2006 – Leave to Appeal granted
Transcripts
- Hearing date 21 and 22 Nov 2006 SC 15/2006 (PDF, 485 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 27 (PDF, 159 KB)
Substantive judgment
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Page 20 of 22