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.

31 July 2026

Case information summary (as at 31 July 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 31 July 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 131 KB) 

All years

Case name
DE; LW and CW v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development
Case number
SC 75/2007
Summary
Civil – appeal against decision refusing a writ of habeas corpus in relation to the first appellant’s child – Family Court issued, on an ex parte basis, an interim custody order under s 78 of the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1989 – whether the s 78 interim custody order was used in an unlawful manner. [2007] NZCA 451 CA 358/07 18 October 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

28 November 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
DE AND ORS V CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT SC 75/2007 [28 November 2007]
Judgment appealed from
DE v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development [2007] NZCA 453 (18 October 2007)
Case name
Taunoa and Others v Attorney-General and Another
Case number
SC 6/2006
Summary
Civil - prisoners claims for compensation for mistreatment by the Department of Corrections - whether Department breached the First, Second and Fourth appellants' rights not to be subjected to cruel, degrading, or disproportionately severe treatment or punishment under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (" NZBORA"), s 9 - whether Department breached the appellants' right to natural justice under NZBORA, s 27(1) - whether the Department breached the appellants' equivalent rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR") and the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment ("CAT") - whether Attorney-General's failure to hold a prompt and impartial investigation of the complaints breached NZBORA, s 9 or CAT or ICCPR - whether Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners 1955 form part of customary international law - whether Prisoners' and Victims' Claims Act 2005 is inconsistent with NZBORA ss 9, 23(5), 27(1); CAT arts 2, 14, 16; ICCPR arts 10(1), 14, 26 - whether Victims' Special Claims Tribunal is independent and impartial or breaches the principles of separation of powers and equality before the law. CA 82/04 8 December 2005
Result

Leave to Appeal granted.

12 April 2006

_________________________

The appeals are dismissed.

The cross-appeals are allowed to the following extent:
1. The damages awarded to Mr Taunoa are reduced to $35,000.
2. The damages awarded to Mr Robinson are reduced to $20,000.
3. The damages awarded to Mr Kidman are reduced to $4,000.

The cross-appeal in relation to Mr Gunbie is dismissed.

Costs are reserved.

31 August 2007
Leave judgment  - leave granted
TAUNOA AND ORS V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND ANOR SC 6/2006 [12 April 2006]
Transcript
Hearing date : 9 and 10 August 2006
Substantive judgment / Media release
TAUNOA AND ORS v THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND ANOR SC 6/2006 [31 August 2007]
Judgment appealed from
Attorney-General v Taunoa [2005] NZCA 312    8 December 2005
Case name
The Secretary for Justice As the New Zealand Central Authority v HJ
Case number
SC 36/2006
Summary
Summary Civil appeal * Care of Children Act 2004 * children wrongfully removed to New Zealand by one parent * other parent made application for an order for children to be returned to Australia * statutory defence to an order available under s 106(1)(a) - whether the Court of Appeal erred in its construction of s 106(1)(a) * whether the Court of Appeal erred in its exercise of discretion under s 106(1)(a). CA 149/04 11 April 2006
Result

Leave to appeal granted.

27 June 2006

___________________________

The appeal is dismissed. Costs are reserved
16 November 2006
Leave judgment  - leave granted
SECRETARY FOR JUSTICE (AS THE NEW ZEALAND CENTRAL AUTHORITY ON BEHALF OF T J) v H J SC 36/2006 [16 November 2006
Judgment appealed from

HJ v Secretary for Justice CA140/04 [2006] NZCA 400  11 April 2006
Transcript
Hearing date : 15 August 2006
Case name
Qiu Jian v The Queen
Case number
SC 41/2006
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against conviction for blackmail – whether standard of proof required for Crown to satisfy co-conspirators rule of evidence is on balance of probabilities or reasonable evidence of common intention – whether failure to advise defendant to testify in her own defence amounted to a miscarriage of justice – whether trial judge failed to give sufficient direction to jury on use which could be made of threats made by alleged co-conspirators. CA 495/05  3 May 2006
Result

29 September 2006 – Application for leave to appeal granted.

_____________________

Appeal allowed, conviction is quashed. New Trial ordered.

5 July 2007
Substantive judgment

QIU JIANG v R SC 41/2006 [5 July 2007]
Judgment appealed from

R v Qiu CA495/05 [2006] NZCA 74  3 May 2006
Leave judgment  - leave granted

JIANG V R SC 41/2006 [9 October 2006]
Transcript

Hearing date : 9 October 2006

Hearing date : 15 February 2007
Case name
Zentrum Holdings Limited and Ngahemi Properties Limited  v The Commmisioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 44/2006
Summary
Civil – tax administration – in Taxation Review Authority (“TRA”) CIR argued unsuccessfully that Zentrum had benefited by a tax avoidance arrangement – on appeal to High Court CIR sought to argue that relevant transactions were shams – whether jurisdictional bar to raising sham argument for first time in High Court – whether it would have been open to CIR to employ sham argument in TRA – whether CIR v VH Farnsworth Ltd [1984] 1 NZLR 428 applies – whether sham argument is subject to time bar in Tax Administration Act 1994, s 108CA 215/05 23 May 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal granted.

19 September 2006

_________________________

Notice of abandonment being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
4 April 2007
Leave judgment  - leave granted

ZENTRUM HOLDINGS LTD AND ANOR v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 44/2006 [19 September 2006] 
Judgment appealed from

Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Zentrum Holdings Ltd [2006] NZCA 99  23 May 2006
Case name
Khyentse Rinpoche Lama v Ross Hope and others
Case number
SC 48/2006
Summary
Civil – religious purpose trust – lay trustees to be supervised by Karmapa (head of Karma Kagyu School of Buddhism) – appellant, not a trustee, appointed by Karmapa as spiritual director – longstanding, international dispute within School over identity of Karmapa’s new incarnation – Court of Appeal recognised non-justiciability of religious and spiritual issues – correct approach to interpreting and enforcing purpose trusts – whether Court of Appeal erred in interpreting trust deed – whether trust deed gave appellant power to remove trustees – whether alternative application by appellant to remove trustees limited to Trustee Act 1956, s 51 or invoked the Court’s inherent jurisdiction to remove – the scope of that inherent jurisdiction – whether Court of Appeal wrong to conclude that appellant had not alleged improper conduct or breaches of trust deed by trustees – whether reinstatement of trustees by Court of Appeal gave rise to an ‘impossible situation’ inimical to attainment of the trust’s objects. CA 51/05 CA 119/05 7 June 2006
Result
Applications for leave to appeal by both the appellant and respondent are dismissed, with cost to the respondent $1,000.
19 September 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Hope v Khyentse Rinpoche Lama CA51/05 [2006] NZCA 117; [2007] 1 NZLR 645; (2006) 1 NZTR 16-009 (7 June 2006)
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LAMA v ROSS HOPE, LAMA KARMA SHEDRU P, THELMA BURCHELL, ELLEN DUCKWORTH AS TRUSTEES OF THE NEW ZEALAND KARMA KAGY U TRUST SC 48/2006 [19 September 2006] (PDF, 14 KB)
Case name
Brent John Gilchrist v The Queen
Case number
SC 69/2006
Summary
Criminal – Tax Administration Act – tax evasion – applicant convicted of knowingly failing to provide Commissioner of Inland Revenue with information when required to do so pursuant to a notice to furnish information – standard of proof of delegation of authority from Commissioner – standard of intent to evade payment of tax.CA 29/06 18 August 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal granted.

29 September 2006

________________

Appeal dismissed.

15 December 2006
Transcript
Hearing date : 7 December 2006
Substantive judgment / Media release
GILCHRIST v R SC 69/2006 [15 December 2006]
Leave judgment  - leave granted
GILCHRIST v R SC 69/2006 [29 September 2006]
Judgment appealed from

The Queen v Gilchrist [2006] NZCA 221    18 August 2006
Case name
Myles James  de Montalk v The Queen
Case number
SC 71/2006
Summary
Criminal – application for leave to appeal out of time – whether Court of Appeal’s alleged refusal to disclose evidence was tainted by racial, religious, or ethnical bias – whether Court of Appeal thereby in breach of New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 25(a).CA 11/04 27 June 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

18 October 2006
Leave judgment  - leave dismissed

DE MONTALK V R SC 71/2006 [18 October 2006] 

Judgment appealed from

The Queen v de Montalk [2006] NZCA 144 (27 June 2006) 
Case name
Hayden Matthew Johnston & Earnscleugh Vineyard Ltd v Schist Mountain Orchards Litd
Case number
SC 75/2006
Summary
Civil – contract – interpretation of agreement for sale and purchase - whether Court of Appeal erred in determining that the agreement permitted the respondent to obtain consent for a subdivision that contained a right of way with dimensions fixed by the territorial authority and not limited to the minimum standards in the relevant District Plan and/or did not require the respondent to obtain the minimum dimensions acceptable to the territorial authority – whether Court of Appeal erred in determining the width of easement in question “of no real moment” – whether applicant able to insist on conditions that limit respondent’s use of easementCA 99/05 24 August 2006
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicants are to pay the respondent costs in the sum of $2,500 plus disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.

13 November 2006
Leave judgment  - leave dismissed
JOHNSTON AND EARNSCLEUGH VINEYARDS LIMITED V SCHIST MOUNTAIN ORCHARDS LIMITED SC 75/2006 [13 November 2006]
Judgment appealed from

Schist Mountain Orchard Limited v Johnston and anor [2006] NZCA 228 (24 August 2006)
Case name
David James Thomas Watt v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2006
Summary
Summary Criminal – appeal against conviction – criminal breach of trust – applicant was trustee and executor of an estate – applicant billed estate and paid himself out of estate funds – finding that applicant knew he was not entitled to be paid – sentenced to 15 months’ imprisonment – whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding conviction. CA 131/06 17 October 2006
Result

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

30 July 2007
Judgment appealed from

The Queen v Watt [2006] NZCA 293 (17 October 2006) 
Leave judgment  - leave dismissed

WATT v R SC 86/2006 [30 July 2007] 
Page 40 of 41