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.
22 September 2026
Case information summary (as at 18 September 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 112 KB)
Case information summary (as at 18 September 2026) – Currently unavailable
All years
Case name
Peter John Chambers v The Queen
Case number
SC 118/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by not admitting evidence under section 44 of the Evidence Act 2006.
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
22 February 2019
22 February 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Anna Elizabeth Osborne and Sonya Lynne Rockhouse v Worksafe New Zealand and District Court at Wellington
Case number
SC 23/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Judicial review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the first respondent had not exercised its prosecutorial discretion unlawfully or unreasonably – Whether the dismissal of charges by the second respondent was ultra vires because the Judge hearing the matter had earlier recused herself from the proceedings.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Osborne v Worksafe New Zealand [2017] NZCA 11).
B Subject to the qualification discussed at [1], the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicants’ appeal to that Court.
19 June 2017
_______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B A declaration is made that the decision of WorkSafe New Zealand to offer no evidence in the prosecution of Peter William Whittall was unlawful.
C Costs are reserved. The parties may file memoranda by 31 January 2018 if an order for costs is sought.
23 November 2017
B Subject to the qualification discussed at [1], the approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicants’ appeal to that Court.
19 June 2017
_______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B A declaration is made that the decision of WorkSafe New Zealand to offer no evidence in the prosecution of Peter William Whittall was unlawful.
C Costs are reserved. The parties may file memoranda by 31 January 2018 if an order for costs is sought.
23 November 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 5 October 2017 (PDF, 241 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2017] NZSC 175 (PDF, 272 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Alister James Reid v The Queen
Case number
SC 29/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the hearsay statement by the complainant was correctly admitted as evidence at the applicant’s trial.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
7 July 2017
7 July 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ALISTER JAMES REID v R [2017] NZSC 108 7 July 2017 (PDF, 69 KB)
Judgment appealed from
DC (not available publicly) :
Case name
Midgen Enterprises Limited and David James Midgen v Water Guard NZ Limited
Case number
SC 32/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in overturning the costs award of the High Court.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants are to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
9 May 2017
B The applicants are to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
9 May 2017
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Bruce James Spittle v The Queen
Case number
SC 47/2017
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its determination that the verdict of the jury in the applicant’s trial was not unreasonable having regard to the evidence.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 6 July 2017
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BRUCE JAMES SPITTLE v R [2017] NZSC 105 6 July 2017 (PDF, 80 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Earl Raymond Hagaman v Andrew James Little
Case number
SC 53/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the High Court erred in holding that the respondent was entitled to claim the defence of qualified privilege in relation to allegedly defamatory statements made by him about the applicant – Whether exceptional circumstances exist warranting a direct appeal to the Supreme Court.
Result
A notice of abandonment having been lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
12 June 2017
Judgment appealed from -HC judgment
Case name
Peter Brent Home Hubbard and Harley Haynes, and Oceanic Palms Limited v Kiwirail Limited
Case number
SC 82/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding a decision of the High Court declining the applicants’ application for relief against forfeiture of a lease.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The application for a stay is dismissed.
C Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondent.
6 October 2017
B The application for a stay is dismissed.
C Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondent.
6 October 2017
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
ESR Group (NZ) Limited v Ian James Burden, Plantation Grown Timbers (International) Limited and Plantation Grown Timbers (Vietnam) Limited
Case number
SC 83/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Copyright Act 1994, ss 35, 120 and 232 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the second and third respondents were entitled to enforce copyright in New Zealand – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the applicant infringed copyright by importation.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $4,500 and reasonable disbursements to the respondents. 20 November 2017
B The applicant is to pay costs of $4,500 and reasonable disbursements to the respondents. 20 November 2017
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Transcript civil leave application hearing
Case name
Studorp Limited & James Hardie New Zealand v Tracey Jane Cridge, Mark Anthony Unwin, Katrina McKellar Fowler, Scott Woodhead & Body Corp 316651
Case number
SC 104/2017
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents.
27 November 2017
B The applicants must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents.
27 November 2017
High Court decision
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Desmond James Albert Conway v Mercedes-Benz Financial Services New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 119/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of the Personal Property Securities Act 1999 and the Property Law Act 2007 – Whether the applicant was mortgagor of vehicles repossessed by the respondent.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
23 February 2018
B The applicant must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
23 February 2018
High Court decision
High Court decision
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Page 11 of 22