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.

19 June 2026

Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 89 KB)
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 126 KB) 

All years

Case name
David Ingram Rowley and Barrie James Skinner v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 51/2011
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Name Suppression – Interim name suppression order granted in the District Court, but overturned in High Court, with a Court of Appeal majority upholding the High Court’s decision – Whether Court of Appeal majority correctly applied the test for name suppression appeals – Whether Court of Appeal majority was right to uphold the view of the High Court Judge that the possible impact on financing of a defence was an irrelevant consideration – Whether Court of Appeal majority was correct in supporting the High Court Judge’s finding that the District Court Judge had failed to take into account a relevant consideration, namely the interest in clients of the appellants in knowing of the charges faced – Whether Court of Appeal majority was justified in holding that the High Court could make its own evaluation of the factors for and against name suppression if the District Court took into account irrelevant considerations or failed to take into account a relevant consideration.[2011] NZCA 160  CA 112/2011
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ROWLEY and SKINNER v COMMISSIONER OF INLAND REVENUE SC 51/2011 [7 July 2011] (PDF, 58 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal is declined.
7 July 2011.
Case name
NV Sumatra Tobacco Trading Company v New Zealand Milk Brands Limited
Case number
SC 79/2011
Summary
Civil – Intellectual Property – Trademark registration – Trade Marks Act 2002 – Whether Court of Appeal erred in not allowing registration of appellant’s mark in relation to tea, cocoa, chocolate, artificial coffee, flavourings for beverages and non-dairy creamer – Whether Court of Appeal misdirected itself on “similar goods” in the context of s 25(1)(b) and (c) of the Trade Marks Act 2002 – Relevance of test in British Sugar Plc v James Robertson & Sons Ltd [1996] RPC 281 (Ch) under the Trade Marks Act 2002. [2011] NZCA 264   CA 25/2009
Dates

The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.

The applicant is to pay the respondent costs in the sum of $2,500. 

22 September 2011
Case name
James Joseph Kapa v The Queen
Case number
SC 114/2011
Summary
[2011] NZCA 504 CA 407/2010 CA 572/2010
Result
Leave to appeal is granted in respect of the sentence of reparation only.
The approved ground is whether the sentence of reparation complied with the requirements of s 32 of the Sentencing Act 2002.  
7 February 2012
____________________________
Appeal is allowed. The sentence of reparation is quashed.
20 December 2012
Media Releases
Transcript

Hearing date : 7 August 2012

Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young, Chambers, Glazebrook J.
Case name
Philip James Whitley v The Queen
Case number
SC 12/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the decision of the District Court ordering a judge only trial under s 361D of the Crimes Act 1961; whether the denial of a jury trial was a justifiable limitation on the right to a jury under s 24(e) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.[2009] NZCA 623  CA 530/2008   22 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WHITLEY v R SC 12/2010 [18 March 2010] (PDF, 15 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

18 March 2010. 
Case name
Brett Stephen Taylor v The Queen
Case number
SC 26/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Unlawful sexual connection – whether the trial Judge erred in his failure to give directions in relation to the unreliability of the complainant’s evidence pursuant to s 122 of the Evidence Act 2006 – whether the inadequacy of the trial Judge’s directions regarding prejudice caused a substantial miscarriage of justice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to admit new expert evidence on appeal[2010] NZCA 69  CA 147/2009   16 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TAYLOR v R SC 26/2010 [20 July 2010] (PDF, 45 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

20 July 2010.
Case name
James Louis Mason v The Queen
Case number
SC 47/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in combining two allegations of criminal conduct to be included in a single count in the indictment.[2010] NZCA 170  CA 481/2009   5 May 2010
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground of appeal is whether the combining in a single count in the indictment of the two allegations (punching the child and pulling his ear) resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
7 July 2010
___________________________
Appeal allowed and the conviction is quashed. No order for a new trial.
3 November 2010
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
MASON v R SC 47/2010 [7 July 2010] (PDF, 6 KB)
Substantive judgment
MASON v R SC 47/2010 [3 November 2010] (PDF, 66 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : 19 October 2010

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Case name
Nathan Stanley Gedye v Colin Robert South, Diane Lee South and Richard James Bureel as Trustees of the South Family Trust
Case number
SC 56/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Building Act 1991 – Alleged breach of vendor warranty for compliance with the Act – interpretation of limitation defence in s 91(2) of the Act – the Court of Appeal held the “act or omission on which the proceedings are based” to be the giving of the contractual warranty rather than the building work itself – the 10 year limitation period in s 91(2) therefore did not bar the respondent’s claim – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding s 91(2) inapplicable[2010] NZCA 207   CA 567/2009   20 May 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
GEDYE v SOUTH, SOUTH AND BURRELL (AS TRUSTEES OF THE SOUTH FAMILY TRUST) SC 56/2010 [5 August 2010] (PDF, 12 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

5 October 2010.
Case name
Robert Erwood v Janet Maxted and others
Case number
SC 66/2010
Result
The appeal is allowed.
The appeal to the Court of Appeal is reinstated. The proceeding is remitted to the Court of Appeal for hearing.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside.
18 March 2011
____________________________
The application by the first respondents for recall is dismissed.
15 July 2011
____________________________
Application by the appellant for recall is dismissed.
25 November 2015
Recall judgment
ROBERT ERWOOD v JANET MAXTED AND JANET MAXTED AND ALEXANDER JAMES JEREMY GLASGOW AS TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF EDWARD ERWOOD [2015] NZSC 181 [25 November 2015] (PDF, 95 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
ERWOOD v MAXTED AND MAXTED GLASGOW AS TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF EDWARD ERWOOD SC 66/2010 [30 November 2010] (PDF, 33 KB)
Substantive judgment
ROBERT ERWOOD v JANET MAXTED AND ALEXANDER JAMES JEREMY GLASGOW AS TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF EDWARD ERWOOD SC 66/2010 [18 March 2011] (PDF, 61 KB)
Recall judgment
ERWOOD v MAXTED AND GLASGOW AS TRUSTEES OF THE ESTATE OF EDWARD ERWOOD SC 66/2010 [15 July 2011] (PDF, 40 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : 18 March 2011

Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Case name
Ratima James O'Donnell @  Ratima Joseph Osborne v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether guilty plea was entered in error causing a miscarriage of justice.[2010] NZCA 372  CA 179/2008  16 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
O'DONNELL AKA OSBORNE v R SC 86/2010 [10 November 2010] (PDF, 34 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

10 November 2010
Case name
Kent James Bond v The Queen
Case number
SC 91/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether evidence was admissible – Whether the trial judge misdirected the jury in summing up – Whether the sentence was excessive.[2010] NZCA 381  CA 109/2010   18 August 2010.
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BOND v R SC 91/2010 [23 November 2010] (PDF, 43 KB)
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

23 November 2010
Page 40 of 43