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
Earl Raymond Hagaman v Andrew James Little
Case number
SC 121/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal on the basis that the proceeding abates with the death of Mr Hagaman.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The personal representatives of Mr Hagaman must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
13 February 2018
B The personal representatives of Mr Hagaman must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
13 February 2018
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter Gerard Stockman v NZ Asscoiation of Counsellors Incorporated
Case number
SC 2/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal should have recalled its judgment ordering standard rather than indemnity costs – Whether judgments must directly refer to all submissions made by parties. [2015] NZCA 542 CA 669/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
There is no order for costs.
29 February 2016
_____
A The application for recall of the Court’s judgment in Stockman v New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc [2016] NZSC 18 is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
7 April 2016
There is no order for costs.
29 February 2016
_____
A The application for recall of the Court’s judgment in Stockman v New Zealand Association of Counsellors Inc [2016] NZSC 18 is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
7 April 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
NZCA judgment appealed from
Case name
Garry Albert Muir and Peter Arnold Maude v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 6/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the applicants’ claims for tax deductions under sub-pt EH of the Income Tax Act 1994 are arguable – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in awarding indemnity costs. [2015] NZCA 591 CA276/2016
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Muir v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2015] NZCA 591).
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was right:
(i) to find that the appellant could not arguably pursue claims for the 1999 and following tax years in reliance on sub-pt EH of the Income Tax Act 1994; and
(ii) to award costs on an indemnity basis against the appellant.
20 July 2016
______________
A The appellant’s application for leave to amend the grounds of appeal is dismissed.
B Leave to appeal is revoked.
C The appellant is to pay costs of $6,000 to the respondent, plus reasonable disbursements.
26 August 2016
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was right:
(i) to find that the appellant could not arguably pursue claims for the 1999 and following tax years in reliance on sub-pt EH of the Income Tax Act 1994; and
(ii) to award costs on an indemnity basis against the appellant.
20 July 2016
______________
A The appellant’s application for leave to amend the grounds of appeal is dismissed.
B Leave to appeal is revoked.
C The appellant is to pay costs of $6,000 to the respondent, plus reasonable disbursements.
26 August 2016
Date of hearing
22 August 2016
Judges
Elias CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Arnold and O'Regan JJ
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Additional document
Case name
W v The Queen
Case number
SC 9/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence.[2011] NZCA 135 CA 591/2010
Result
A An extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2 May 2016
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
2 May 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
IVAN JAMES WILSON v R [2016] NZSC 47 2 May 2016 (PDF, 78 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Auckland Council v Wendco (NZ) Limited and Wiri Licensing Trust
Case number
SC 14/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Resource Management Act 1991, s 95E – Whether the Court of Appeal interpreted the phrase “related to” in s 95E too broadly – Whether the first respondent is an affected person in terms of the second respondent’s application for resource consent. [2015] NZCA 617 CA 379/2014
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Wendco (NZ) Ltd v Auckland Council [2015] NZCA 617).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the Auckland Council was required to give Wendco (NZ) Ltd notification of the resource consent application made by the Wiri Licensing Trust.
16 June 2016
_____________________
A The appeal is allowed, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the judgment of Peters J reinstated.
B Costs in the High Court are to be fixed in that Court.
C Costs in the Court of Appeal are to be fixed by that Court.
D In this Court, the first respondent is to pay the appellant costs of $10,000 and the second respondent costs of $5,000 along with, in both instances, reasonable disbursements.
17 July 2017
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the Auckland Council was required to give Wendco (NZ) Ltd notification of the resource consent application made by the Wiri Licensing Trust.
16 June 2016
_____________________
A The appeal is allowed, the judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aside and the judgment of Peters J reinstated.
B Costs in the High Court are to be fixed in that Court.
C Costs in the Court of Appeal are to be fixed by that Court.
D In this Court, the first respondent is to pay the appellant costs of $10,000 and the second respondent costs of $5,000 along with, in both instances, reasonable disbursements.
17 July 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 8 November 2016 (PDF, 575 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2017] NZSC 113 (PDF, 262 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Martin James Mailley v District Court at North Shore and New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 36/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 48(4) of the Extradition Act 1999. [2016] NZCA 83 CA716/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 20 June 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Wayne James Bracken v The Queen
Case number
SC 40/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the trial Judge’s directions were adequate – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the trial was not unfair. [2016] NZCA 79 CA785/2012
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
13 September 2016
13 September 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Hilary Jane Calvert & HGW Trustees Ltd (as trustees of the Frongopoulos Trust & Anor) & Chris James v Grant Bruce REYNOLDS as liquidator of James Developments Ltd (in liquidation)
Case number
SC 51/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 28 of the Limitation Act 1950 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the breadth of the discretion under s 301 of the Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in following Mana Property Trustee Ltd v James Development Ltd [2010] NZSC 90. [2016] NZCA 151 CA173/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants (jointly and severally) must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
9 August 2016
B The applicants (jointly and severally) must pay costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
9 August 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Whetu Sonny James Waiwai v The Queen
Case number
SC 54/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its finding that the jury’s verdict was not unreasonable – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that evidence from a hostile Crown witness was admissible. [2016] NZCA 167 CA603/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
13 July 2016
13 July 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter Alan Hutchins v The Queen
Case number
SC 67/2016
Summary
Criminal appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding no risk of miscarriage despite concluding that jury directions did not conform with best practice. [2016] NZCA 173 CA403/2015
Result
A An extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
31 August 2016
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
31 August 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 12 of 22