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
Kay Halton Skelton v Christopher Dean Jones
Case number
SC 90/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – abduction of parties’ child – applicant currently imprisoned for contempt for non-compliance with orders made by High Court under Habeas Corpus Act 2001 –appeal to Court of Appeal abandoned following decision now subject of application for leave to appeal in SC 88/2006 – applicant also facing criminal proceedings in relation to abduction – whether habeas corpus proceedings in High Court should be stayed or struck out as abuse of process – whether breach of natural justice prior to orders being made – whether sufficient evidential basis for orders – whether orders interim or final – whether High Court, having ordered release of child in discharge of its function under the Habeas Corpus Act, lacked jurisdiction to make further orders relating to swearing of affidavit by, and cross-examination of, applicant – whether orders, with or without accompanying safeguards, breached applicant’s right to silence as a person charged with a criminal offence (s 25 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990).CIV 2006 419 1489 18 October 2006
Result
6 December 2006
________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs reserved. Reasons to be given later.
Case name
The New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated v Air New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 91/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – whether s44(2) of the Holidays Act 2003 permits an employee’s entitlement to the observance of designated public holidays to be transferred by agreement to another day or days so as to remove, in respect of the specified public holidays, entitlement under the Act to payment on a time and a half basis – whether leave to appeal should be granted notwithstanding that the applicant succeeded in the Court of Appeal.. CA 474/06 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
7 March 2007
____________________________
Appeal and Cross Appeal dismissed.
Order of Court of Appeal remitting the proceeding to the Employment Court stands.
Costs to appellant $25,000 plus disbursements.
Order for Costs in Court of Appeal stands.
14 November 2007
Case name
Alain Michael Mafart and Dominique Angela Francoise Prieur v Television New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 50/2005
Summary
Leave to search, inspect and copy criminal records held by the High Court - videotape of Rainbow Warrior proceedings - jurisdiction of Court of Appeal - whether application for leave to search is civil or criminal - whether Court of Appeal jurisdiction precluded by the Judicature Act 1908, s 66. CA 92/05 4 August 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted 21 September 2005
Case name
John Patrick Round v The Queen
Case number
SC 59/2005
Summary
Criminal - whether counsel's alleged failures in cross-examination of the complainant, and not forcefully advising the applicant to give evidence led to a real risk of an unsafe verdict. CA 125/05 29 August 2005
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 24 November 2005
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Roger Wilson Steele and Christine Lynne Roberts v Eleftarious Serepisos
Case number
SC 68/2005
Summary
Civil appeal – whether the vendor subdivider was entitled to bring the contract to an end or treat it as at an end because the provisions of s 225 of the Resource Management Act 1991 had not been fulfilled within a reasonable time - whether the vendor was obliged to give the purchaser notice of their intention to bring the contract to an end or allow the purchaser an opportunity fulfil the conditions of s 225 of the Act.CA 203/04 12 October 2005
Result
Leave to appeal granted to appellant and respondent. 15 February 2006 ______________________________ The appeal is allowed.
The cross-appeal is dismissed.
The orders made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
In their place we make an order for the entry of judgment in the High Court in favour of the appellants.
The appellants are to have costs in the High Court as fixed by that Court in the light of this judgment, and in the Court of Appeal the appellants are to have costs of $6,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court.
The appellants are to have costs in this Court of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of this Court. 4 September 2006
Case name
Governors Ltd & Stephen Kevin Chamberlain v George Albert Anderson and others
Case number
SC 75/2005
Summary
Civil - business premises unlawfully re-entered by landlord - whether damages correctly assessed - whether Court of Appeal properly dismissed an application to produce further evidence, without allowing the applicants to be heardCA 94/04 19 December 2005
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 5 April 2006
Case name
Wynston Alexander Cecil Chirnside & Rattray Properties Limited v Richard Elmore Fay
Case number
SC CIV 7/2004
Summary
Civil appeal – commercial relationship for the purposes of property development – whether this gave rise to a joint venture of a commercial kind – whether a fiduciary relationship can arise where parties are negotiating towards a joint venture – whether in this case the parties owed fiduciary obligations to each other.
Result
A. The appeal and cross-appeal are each allowed in part.
B. The damages and interest awards made by the Court of Appeal are set aside.
C. The judgment entered for Mr Fay against Mr Chirnside in the High Court is varied from $495,000 to $850,000 plus interest as awarded by the High Court.
D. Judgment is entered for Mr Fay against Rattray Properties Ltd for $850,000 plus interest in the same terms as awarded against Mr Chirnside. E.  The caveat lodged by Mr Fay against the title to the Harvey Norman project is to be removed. F.  Mr Chirnside is to pay Mr Fay costs in respect of the proceedings in this court in the total sum of $15,000 plus disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the registrar.  The costs awarded to Mr Fay in the Court of Appeal are increased from $4,000 to $10,000.  Costs in the High Court are to remain as fixed by that court. 6 September 2006
Transcripts
Media Releases
Supreme court decision
Minute granting leave (PDF, 12 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Case name
Attorney-General v Ahmed Zaoui, Inspector General of Intelligence and Security, and Human Rights Commissioner
Case number
SC CIV 19/2004
Summary
Civil appeal - judicial review of the standard to be applied by Inspector General in reviewing a security risk certificate issued under Part A of the Immigration Act 1997 in respect of a refugee who is said to be a threat to national security - whether Inspector General required to take into consideration New Zealand's international obligations, including but not limited to, the Refugee Convention - if so, what standard of risk does international law require before certificate can be confirmed. CA20/04 19 November 2004
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
3 February 2005
_______________________
The first respondent is granted leave to cross appeal. The declarations made by the Court of Appeal are set aside. The Court makes the following declarations: 1. Those applying article 33.2 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 under Part 4A of the Immigration Act 1987 are to apply it in its own terms. In particular, to come within article 33.2, the person in question must be thought on reasonable grounds to pose a serious threat to the security of New Zealand; the threat must be based on objectively reasonable grounds and the threatened harm must be substantial. 2. In carrying out his function under Part 4A of the Immigration Act the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security is concerned only to determine whether the relevant security criteria - here s 72 and article 33.2 - are satisfied. He is not to determine whether Mr Zaoui is subject to a threat which would or might prevent his removal from New Zealand. To the extent that the above declarations differ from those made by the Court of Appeal, the appeal and the cross-appeal are allowed.
21 June 2005
Case name
Henry John Esdaile Nation v Nicola Mary Nation
Case number
SC CIV 26/2004
Summary
Relationship property - whether the determination of the date for assessment of the effect of disposition under s44C Property (Relationships) Act 1976 should be the date of the hearing - whether certain livestock is relationship property - whether a 'put to use' arrangement in respect of livestock can have the status of a property right for the purpose of s10(2) CA 190/03 26 November 2004
Result
21 April 2005

Leave to appeal granted.

8 April 2005

__________________

Notice of abandonment being lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.

Transcript

Hearing date 5 April 2005

Hearing date : 22 July 2005

Case name
Leonard Murray Rohrlach
Case number
SC CRI 4/2004
Summary
Criminal appeal against conviction - Whether trial counsel error amounted to a miscarriage of justice - Whether s344A application should have been opposed by defence counsel - Whether complainant should have been cross-examined in relation to medical and ESR evidence - Whether detective should have been cross-examined in relation to record of appellant's statements - Whether appellant able to make informed decision about giving evidence at trial. CA272/03 28 April 2004
Result
30 June 2004 - No jurisdiction to entertain appeal as no consent from respondent pursuant to Section 51 (2) (d).
Judgment appealed from
not publicly available