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
Saxmere Company Limited v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Limited
Case number
SC 124/2010
Summary
[2010] NZCA 513 CA 784/2009 17 November 2010
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs to the respondent of $2,500.
9 March 2011.
Case name
OH v The Queen
Case number
SC 125/2010
Summary
Criminal – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – validity and scope of search warrants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the validity of search warrants issued under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act can be used to authorise surveillance on private land – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – unreasonable search and seizure – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the police in this case did not breach s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Evidence Act 2006 – admissibility of evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its undertaking of the s 30 balancing exercise and in concluding that the evidence in dispute was admissible at trial[2010] NZCA 528 CA 825/2009 19 November 2010
Result
The appeal allowed in part. The video surveillance evidence (other than footage of vehicles on Reid Road) is inadmissible against those appellants. All the other disputed evidence is admissible against them. 2 September 2011.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
HAMED v R SC 125/2010 [2 September 2011] (PDF, 551 KB)
Dates
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
The approved grounds are whether the challenged evidence was lawfully obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 or was, alternatively, properly admissible pursuant to s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.
25 March 2011
Hearing
3 and 4 May 2011
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
Karen McGrath v Accident Compensation Corporation
Case number
SC 127/2010
Summary
Civil – Accident Compensation Act 2001 – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that the ACC had a reasonable basis under s 110(3) Accident Compensation Act to require the Applicant to undergo a vocational independence assessment.[2010] NZCA 535 CA 302/2009 19 November 2010
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted.
B The approved ground is whether the Court of Appeal in [2010] NZCA 535 has correctly interpreted and applied s 110(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001.
8 March 2011
___________________
A The appeal is allowed and the notice given on 9 September 2008 by the Accident Compensation Corporation is quashed.
B Costs are reserved. Counsel may file memoranda if necessary.
7 July 2011
B The approved ground is whether the Court of Appeal in [2010] NZCA 535 has correctly interpreted and applied s 110(3) of the Accident Compensation Act 2001.
8 March 2011
___________________
A The appeal is allowed and the notice given on 9 September 2008 by the Accident Compensation Corporation is quashed.
B Costs are reserved. Counsel may file memoranda if necessary.
7 July 2011
Media Releases
- sc 127 2010 karen mcgrath v acc press release (PDF, 84 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young J.
Case name
TWI and others v The Queen
Case number
SC 128/2010 ; 129/2010; 130/2010; 131/2010; 132/2010; 133/2010/ 135/2010; 138/2010; 139/2010
Summary
Criminal – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – validity and scope of search warrants – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the validity of search warrants issued under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957; whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act can be used to authorise surveillance on private land – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – unreasonable search and seizure – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the police in this case did not breach s 21 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Evidence Act 2006 – admissibility of evidence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its undertaking of the s 30 balancing exercise and in concluding that the evidence in dispute was admissible at trial[2010] NZCA 497 CA 809/2009 19 November 2010
Result
A The appeals of Mr Tame Iti, Mr Te Rangiwhiria Kemara, Mr Urs Signer and Ms Emily Bailey are dismissed. B The appeals of the other appellants are allowed in part. The video surveillance evidence (other than footage of vehicles on Reid Road) is inadmissible against those appellants. All the other disputed evidence is admissible against them.
2 September 2011.
2 September 2011.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Supreme court decision
HAMED v R SC 125/2010 [2 September 2011] (PDF, 551 KB)
Dates
The application for leave to appeal is granted.
The approved grounds are whether the challenged evidence was lawfully obtained under s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 or was, alternatively, properly admissible pursuant to s 30 of the Evidence Act 2006.
25 March 2011
Hearing
3 and 4 May 2011
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Gault JJ.
Case name
Evgeny Orlov v Anza Distributing NZ Limited and USG Interiors Pacific Limited
Case number
SC 136/2010
Summary
Civil – costs – whether Court of Appeal with jurisdiction to strike out appeal against costs judgment in circumstances where no dispute between parties and main purpose of appeal to challenge legal basis of decision and factual findings that counsel had failed to reach minimum standard of competence that should be attained by officers of the Court – whether appropriate for appellant to pay for an amicus to act as contradictor – whether Court of Appeal decision contravened appellant’s rights under New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990; International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights; and United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers. [2010] NZCA 536 CA 683/2009 22 November 2010
Additional document
sc 136 2010 orlov v anza fees review (PDF, 21 KB)
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. No order for costs.
29 March 2011.
Case name
WAH v WTW and others
Case number
SC 142/2010
Summary
Civil Appeal – Care of Children Act 2004 – High Court made order that children should remain under guardianship of High Court and that permanent homes outside the family be found – Whether High Court adopted the wrong test under s 5(e) Care of Children Act for assessing psychological violence to children – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding High Court Judge not required to recuse herself – Whether High Court gave insufficient weight to Māori cultural issues – Whether High Court wrong to call appellant’s former counsel as witness – Whether Court of Appeal failed to address constitutional separation of powers issue.[2010] NZCA 577 CA 40/2010 2 December 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
sc 142 2010 wah v wtw and ors (PDF, 35 KB)
Dates
The application by the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development for leave to intervene is granted.
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
14 March 2011.
Case name
Arthur William Taylor v The Queen
Case number
SC 5/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – kidnapping and escaping from lawful custody – appeal against conviction and sentence – whether a plea of previous acquittal was available to the applicant at his trial – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to hold that whether the applicant was in lawful custody was an issue for the judge – whether the sentence was excessive [2008] NZCA 558 CA 61/2008 17 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
15 May 2009
15 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TAYLOR v R SC 5/2009 [15 May 2009] (PDF, 15 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Ink Media Limited v The Queen
Case number
SC 16/2009
Summary
Criminal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Court had jurisdiction to try the applicants – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the applicants had sold and advertised medicines in breach of the Medicines Act 1981 by using the internet.[2008] NZCA 563 CA 18/2008 18 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
30 April 2009
30 April 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WAUGH v R SC 15/2009 [30 April 2009] (PDF, 15 KB)
Case name
Ports of Auckland Limited v Southpac Trucks Limited
Case number
SC 18/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Carriage of Goods Act 1979 – Statutory Interpretation – Proper meaning of s 6 “not liable as such” – Whether Court of Appeal erred in its application of the statutory exemption conferred in s 6 of the Carriage of Goods Act – Whether Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that fork lift operator negligently driving into truck and causing $60,000 damage was exempt from liability under s 16(2) of the Carriage of Goods Act with the consequence that Ports of Auckland Ltd could not be held vicariously liable.[2008] NZCA 573 CA 355/2007 22 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
3 April 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed and the judgment of the High Court is restored. Appellant awarded costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements. Costs order in the Court of Appeal is reversed.
30 October 2009
3 April 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed and the judgment of the High Court is restored. Appellant awarded costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements. Costs order in the Court of Appeal is reversed.
30 October 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 October 2009 (PDF, 150 KB)
Media Releases
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Securities Registry Limited and another v Virginia Gomes
Case number
SC 19/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – loan agreement conditional on payment of a sum by a third party to the debtor – sum paid to the debtor by way of setoff against the debtor’s debt to the third party – setoff occurred without the knowledge of the lender – debtor’s accountant represented to the lender that the sum was “being held” by debtor – whether negligent misstatement – whether misleading or deceptive conduct under s 9 of the Fair Trading Act 1986 [2008] NZCA 567 CA 355/2007 19 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to respondent.
28 April 2009
28 April 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Page 61 of 78