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
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
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
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
Leave judgment - leave granted

Substantive judgment / Media release
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
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
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.
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
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
Case name
Alistair James Haskett v The Queen
Case number
SC 34/2006
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction for driving at a speed exceeding 100 kilometres per hour – use of speed camera image as evidence of offence – whether production of image purporting to be taken by approved vehicle surveillance equipment is sufficient evidence to prove offence – requirements for testing and accuracy of approved vehicle surveillance equipment – Land Transport Act 1998, ss 145, 146 CA 261/05 30 March 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
3 July 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
James Charles Morris Parlane v Waipa District Council
Case number
SC 53/2006
Summary
Criminal – third appeal against conviction and sentence – breaches of fire control bylaw – reference in bylaw to incinerator standard “withdrawn” by Standards New Zealand before bylaw passed – whether this reference invalidated part or whole of bylaw or took applicant outside its reach – severability of subparagraph including reference – whether Court of Appeal wrong to hold that a local authority may consider a revoked standard to be appropriate for its practical purposes – Court of Appeal emphasised that applicant has brought separate public law proceedings seeking quashing of bylaw – whether Court of Appeal wrong to conclude that severance of subparagraph by High Court, whether or not appropriate, unnecessary because bylaw valid on evidence before it – applicant also seeking reversal of costs order in District Court under Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967. CA 319/05  6 July 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed, with costs of $1,000 to the respondent.
19 September 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed