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
Dean John Drever v The Queen
Case number
SC 64/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that there was not a miscarriage of justice– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the minimum period of imprisonment. [2016] NZCA 249 CA457/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
27 July 2016
27 July 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
DEAN JOHN DREVER v R [2016] NZSC 92 27 July 2016 (PDF, 94 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
John Edward Whitehead and others (as trustees of J and R Whitehead Trust) and Shiloh Charitable Trust v Watson & Son Limited and Denis Eric Watson and Meryl Joy Watson (as trustees of Salem Charitable Trust of Masterton)
Case number
SC 65/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in their finding that the rental owed had been assigned and discharged – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that amounts owed under sale and purchase agreement could be set-off by amounts owed under rental agreement. [2016] NZCA 241 CA750/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
B The applicants are to pay the respondents costs of $2,500
30 August 2016
B The applicants are to pay the respondents costs of $2,500
30 August 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HC judgments
Case name
Olivia Waiyee Lee v Whangarei District Council
Case number
SC 68/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of the limitation provisions of the Building Act 2004 and Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006.[2016] NZCA 258 CA656/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Olivia Waiyee Lee v Whangarei District Council [2016] NZCA 258).
B The approved question is whether, in terms of s 37 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006, the application for an assessor’ s report, “stopped the clock” for limitation purposes with regard to the proceedings against the respondent.
C In all other respects the application is dismissed.
3 August 2016
____________
A The appeal is allowed. The order for summary judgment is set aside.
B Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the appellant. We certify for second counsel.
C If not agreed, costs are to be set in the High Court and the Court of Appeal in the light of this judgment.
22 December 2016
B The approved question is whether, in terms of s 37 of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006, the application for an assessor’ s report, “stopped the clock” for limitation purposes with regard to the proceedings against the respondent.
C In all other respects the application is dismissed.
3 August 2016
____________
A The appeal is allowed. The order for summary judgment is set aside.
B Costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements are awarded to the appellant. We certify for second counsel.
C If not agreed, costs are to be set in the High Court and the Court of Appeal in the light of this judgment.
22 December 2016
Transcripts
- Hearing date 19 October 2016 (PDF, 425 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2016] NZSC 173 (PDF, 258 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Murray Athold Osmond and Janet Doreen Osmond v David Murray Blanchett and Colin Thomas McCloy as liquidators of Arai Korp Limited (in liquidation)
Case number
SC 69/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to hearing an appeal from summary judgment proceedings – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its evaluation of the evidence. [2016] NZCA 204 CA358/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed
B The applicants are to pay the respondents costs of $2,500
26 August 2016
B The applicants are to pay the respondents costs of $2,500
26 August 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Derek Peter Wheeldon and Carol Ann Wheeldon, Anthony John Butcher and Ruth Barbara Rogers, Larry Lawrence Small and KM Trustees Services Limited, Ivor Anthony Millington and Neville Eade v Body Corporate 342525
Case number
SC 70/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal –– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 138(1)(d) of the Unit Titles Act 2010 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 49(1) of the Building Act 2004 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of the Building Code. [2016] NZCA 247 CA290/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed B The applicants are to pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
14 September 2016
14 September 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Auckland Council and James Hardie New Zealand v Weathertight Homes Tribunal, and The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and Body Corporate 19500, and Gefei Liang and Others
Case number
SC 72/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the effect of s 141(4) of the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2006 is that the multi-unit complex claim does not need to independently meet the s 16(a) eligibility criterion for resolution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the effect of s 141(4) of the 2006 Act is that all of the claimants represented in the multi-unit complex claim receive the benefit of the date the withdrawn claim was brought under the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services Act 2002 for the purposes of s 37 of the 2006 Act.[2016] NZCA 256 CA552/2015, CA564/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B Costs of $2,500 are payable by the applicants to the second respondent.
C Costs of $2,500 are payable by the applicants to the third and fourth respondents.
16 September 2016
B Costs of $2,500 are payable by the applicants to the second respondent.
C Costs of $2,500 are payable by the applicants to the third and fourth respondents.
16 September 2016
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Green Growth No. 2 Limited v Queen Elizabeth The Second National Trust
Case number
SC 84/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent was entitled to rectification of the covenant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the covenant was not invalid – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent’s notification of the covenant was not wrongful in terms of s 81 of the Land Transfer Act 1952. [2016] NZCA 308 CA47/2015
Result
A The appeal is allowed to the extent only that the order for rectification is set aside.
B There is a declaration that for the purposes of cls 2 and 7 of the second schedule of the open space covenant references to “protected area” mean the whole block of land subject to the covenant.
C The appellant is to pay the respondent costs of $25,000 and usual disbursements.
17 August 2018
_______________________
A The application for partial recall of this Court’s judgment of 17 August 2018 (Green Growth No 2 Ltd v Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust [2018] NZSC 75) is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
26 November 2018
B There is a declaration that for the purposes of cls 2 and 7 of the second schedule of the open space covenant references to “protected area” mean the whole block of land subject to the covenant.
C The appellant is to pay the respondent costs of $25,000 and usual disbursements.
17 August 2018
_______________________
A The application for partial recall of this Court’s judgment of 17 August 2018 (Green Growth No 2 Ltd v Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust [2018] NZSC 75) is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
26 November 2018
Transcripts
- Hearing date 13 February 2018 (PDF, 547 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2018] NZSC 75 (PDF, 68 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Recall judgment
Case name
Demissie Tefera Asgedom v The Queen
Case number
SC 90/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the applicants were not materially prejudiced by the form of the indictment – Whether the applicants were prejudiced by the addition of a new alleged party to the offence part way through the trial – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant’s were not prejudiced by non-disclosure of certain material – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the second applicant’s appeal against sentence. [2016] NZCA 334 CA451/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
25 October 2016
25 October 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Nebiyou Tefera Demissie v The Queen
Case number
SC 91/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the applicants were not materially prejudiced by the form of the indictment – Whether the applicants were prejudiced by the addition of a new alleged party to the offence part way through the trial – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant’s were not prejudiced by non-disclosure of certain material – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the second applicant’s appeal against sentence. [2016] NZCA 334 CA533/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
25 October 2016
25 October 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
G v The Queen
Case number
SC 92/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 30 – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to hold that information obtained from a third party without a search warrant or production order is admissible as evidence in the applicant’ s trial. [2016] NZCA 390 CA161/2016
Result
Judgment released.
Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
4 May 2017
Order prohibiting publication of the judgment and any part of the proceedings (including the result) in news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of trial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
4 May 2017
Judgment appealed from
[2016] NZCA 390 CA161/2016
Page 32 of 78