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 July 2026

Case information summary (as at 17 July 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 17 July 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 128 KB) 

All years

Case name
Sanctuary Community Organic Garden Mahi Whenua Incorporated v Attorney-General
Case number
SC 4/2026
Summary

Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

Result

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order as to costs.
28 April 2026

Case name
Aislyn Monroe v Te Whatu Ora | Health New Zealand, Chief Executive of Oranga Tamariki | Ministry for Children and President of the Paediatric Society of New Zealand
Case number
SC 58/2026
Summary

Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

Case name
Hairland Holdings Ltd v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Case number
SC 62/2025
Summary

Civil Appeal 

Result

A Leave to appeal is granted (Chief Executive of Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment v Hairland Holdings Ltd [2025] NZCA 219).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal on the basis that the Employment Relations Authority does not have jurisdiction to hear an application, brought by a purported employer against the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, the Labour Inspector and/or its workers, for a bare declaration that its workers are not employees under s 6(1) of the Employment Relations Act 2000.
1 October 2025

Date of hearing
05 May 2026
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Ellen France, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Case name
Ms Henderson v Oranga Tamariki - Ministry for Children
Case number
SC 74/2025
Summary

Civil appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

Result

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500
30 September 2025

Case name
Body Corporate 355492 v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Case number
SC 105/2025
Summary

Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal

Result

A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
1 December 2025

Case name
Abdullah Robert Boyd v Australian Federal Police, New South Wales Legal Aid, New Zealand Defence Force, New Zealand Police, Attorney-General, Office of the Inspectorate, Canterbury Intelligence Team and Ministry of Health
Case number
SC 40/2024
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to adduce further evidence is dismissed.
C The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
D There is no order as to costs.
30 July 2024
Case name
Christine Fleming v Attorney-General and Justin James Coote
Case number
SC 42/2024
Summary

Civil Appeal

Result

A The application for leave to appeal by Ms Fleming is granted in part to the extent described below (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:
(i) to determine that Ms Fleming was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000; and
(ii) as to the test for “work” when work is conducted by homeworkers who work overnight in their home.
C The application for leave to appeal by Mr Humphreys is granted (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
D The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to determine that Mr Humphreys was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 for the period from August 2020 onwards when in receipt of funding under the Individualised Funding scheme.
E Counsel in both appeals are asked to address the matters set out at [1]–[2] below.
4 October 2024
_________________________________________________

A Ms Fleming’s appeal (SC 42/2024) is allowed. 
B The Employment Court declaration as to Ms Fleming’s  employee status is reinstated.
C The question of determination of the quantum of remedies  for Ms Fleming is remitted to the Employment Court.
D Mr Humphreys’ appeal (SC 44/2024) is allowed. 
E The Employment Court declaration as to Mr Humphreys’  employee status is reinstated.
F The first respondent must pay the appellant in SC 44/2024 costs of $50,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
G Subject to Order F, costs in SC 42/2024 and SC 44/2024 are otherwise reserved. If parties cannot agree on costs, counsel are to file memoranda (maximum of 5 pages) on costs; counsel for Ms Fleming by 5 February 2026 and each of the respondents by 19 February 2026.
9 December 2025

Date of hearing
29 April 2025 - 30 April 2025
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Ellen France, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Case name
Peter Humphreys v Attorney-General
Case number
SC 44/2024
Summary

Civil Appeal

Result

A The application for leave to appeal by Ms Fleming is granted in part to the extent described below (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:
(i) to determine that Ms Fleming was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000; and
(ii) as to the test for “work” when work is conducted by homeworkers who work overnight in their home.
C The application for leave to appeal by Mr Humphreys is granted (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
D The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to determine that Mr Humphreys was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 for the period from August 2020 onwards when in receipt of funding under the Individualised Funding scheme.
E Counsel in both appeals are asked to address the matters set out at [1]–[2] below.
4 October 2024
_______________________________________________________________
A Ms Fleming’s appeal (SC 42/2024) is allowed. 
B The Employment Court declaration as to Ms Fleming’s  employee status is reinstated.
C The question of determination of the quantum of remedies  for Ms Fleming is remitted to the Employment Court.
D Mr Humphreys’ appeal (SC 44/2024) is allowed. 
E The Employment Court declaration as to Mr Humphreys’  employee status is reinstated.
F The first respondent must pay the appellant in SC 44/2024 costs of $50,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
G Subject to Order F, costs in SC 42/2024 and SC 44/2024 are otherwise reserved. If parties cannot agree on costs, counsel are to file memoranda (maximum of 5 pages) on costs; counsel for Ms Fleming by 5 February 2026 and each of the respondents by 19 February 2026.
9 December 2025

Date of hearing
29 April 2025 - 30 April 2025
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Ellen France, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Case name
John Ross v Patrick Kannemeyer and Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Case number
SC 45/2024
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to each of the first and second respondents.
1 August 2024
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Serenity Pilgrim, Anna Courage, Rose Standtrue, Crystal Loyal, Pearl Valor and Virginia Courage v Howard Temple, Samuel Valor, Faithful Pilgrim, Noah Hopeful and Stephen Standfast
Case number
SC 52/2024
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay the respondents costs of $2,500.
5 August 2024