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
Mission Bay Pharmacy Limited v Drive Holdings Limited
Case number
SC 55/2006
Summary
Civil – application for summary judgment – whether Court of Appeal erred in upholding High Court decision granting summary judgment – whether any oral agreement to lease was enforceable between the parties by virtue of s 47 Land Transfer (Computer Registers and Electronic Lodgement) Amendment Act 2002 – whether respondent had waived conditions as to time – whether a general contractual obligation of good faith exists – conduct of contractual negotiations. CA 98/05 29 June 2006
Result
Notice of Discontinuance being filed, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 28 August 2006
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Kahala Holdings Limited (formerly Nalder & Biddle (Nelson) Limited v C & F Fishing Ltd
Case number
SC 67/2006
Summary
Civil – contract – incorporation of exclusion clauses – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding clauses had not been sufficiently brought to the attention of the respondent – whether Court of Appeal erred in effectively applying a two-stage test to the incorporation of the conditions in question – whether conditions were unusual or onerous in the circumstances. CA 145/05 31 July 2006
Result
Applications for leave to appeal and cross appeal dismissed.
Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent. 21 November 2006
Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent. 21 November 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Noel Clement Rogers v Television New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 68/2006
Summary
Civil – privacy – freedom of expression – order for permanent injunction, suppressing publication of video tape, made by High Court and quashed by Court of Appeal – tape contained reconstruction of murder by applicant – tape ruled inadmissible at murder trial due to breaches of New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – applicant acquitted at trial – claim that publication of tape would constitute unlawful interference with applicant’s privacy – whether Court of Appeal erred in giving insufficient weight to principles of proper and fair administration of justice – applicability of defence of legitimate public concern – threshold for prior restraint. CA 12/06 7 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. 17 October 2006
___________________
Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
16 November 2007
___________________
Appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
16 November 2007
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 91 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Alain Michael Yves Mafart and Dominique Angela Francoise Prieur v Television New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 70/2006
Summary
Civil – Criminal Proceedings (Search of Court Records) Rules 1974 – video footage of guilty pleas in 1985 trial for bombing of Rainbow Warrior – whether Court of Appeal erred in failing adequately to take account of the administration of justice – whether Court of Appeal erred in failing to protect privacy interests of appellants, or in balancing those interests with freedom of information – whether Court of Appeal erred in departing from previous decisions in respect of the footage – whether Court of Appeal and High Court erred in failing to uphold assurance given to counsel by Judge in 1985 in respect of footage – whether assurance overtaken by consent orders.CA 92/05 7 and 10 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs of $2,500 to respondent. 26 September 2006
Judgment appealed from
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Kimberley Birkenfeld v Yachting New Zealand Inc
Case number
SC 72/2006
Summary
Civil – application by respondent for decree limiting its liability – whether Court of Appeal was correct in holding that a rigid inflatable boat (under 24m in length) is a ‘ship’ for the purposes of the application of s 85 of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 – whether purpose of Limitation Convention to facilitate commercial shipping – application of the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships.CA 171/05 9 August 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $1,500 to respondent. 10 November 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Hayden Matthew Johnston & Earnscleugh Vineyard Ltd v Schist Mountain Orchards Litd
Case number
SC 75/2006
Summary
Civil – contract – interpretation of agreement for sale and purchase - whether Court of Appeal erred in determining that the agreement permitted the respondent to obtain consent for a subdivision that contained a right of way with dimensions fixed by the territorial authority and not limited to the minimum standards in the relevant District Plan and/or did not require the respondent to obtain the minimum dimensions acceptable to the territorial authority – whether Court of Appeal erred in determining the width of easement in question “of no real moment” – whether applicant able to insist on conditions that limit respondent’s use of easementCA 99/05 24 August 2006
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicants are to pay the respondent costs in the sum of $2,500 plus disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
The applicants are to pay the respondent costs in the sum of $2,500 plus disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
13 November 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Prime Commercial Limited v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Limited
Case number
SC 85/2006
Summary
Summary Civil appeal – applicant unsuccessful participant in “ informal” tender process conducted by respondent – whether summary judgment should have been granted for respondent – whether Courts below erred in rejecting existence of process contract and thereby all other causes of action – whether duty of care or statutory duty owed by respondent to applicant in conducting sale process – whether Courts below erred in finding that representations by respondent were neither negligent nor (in terms of s 9 Fair Trading Act 1986) misleading or deceptive. CA 110/05 18 October 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
7 March 2007
7 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Lindsday Allan Clark v Libra Developments Limited and Russell Ernest Hyslop
Case number
SC 87/2006
Summary
Civil – partnership – First Respondent removed from companies register and subsequently reinstated – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding that parties’ partnership continued on removal from the register of the First Respondent – whether Court of Appeal erred in finding the partnership included new ventures entered into during the period the First Respondent was removed from the register – whether s 158 Companies Act validates actions of sole director after bankruptcy results in his or her being disqualified from holding office – whether company removed from the register capable of continuing to be a partner in a partnership – effect on partnership of company’s property vesting in the Crown (s 324 Companies Act) if partnership not automatically dissolved.CA 26/05 31 October 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 and disbursements to the respondent. 15 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
The New Zealand Airline Pilots’ Association Industrial Union of Workers Incorporated v Air New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 91/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – whether s44(2) of the Holidays Act 2003 permits an employee’s entitlement to the observance of designated public holidays to be transferred by agreement to another day or days so as to remove, in respect of the specified public holidays, entitlement under the Act to payment on a time and a half basis – whether leave to appeal should be granted notwithstanding that the applicant succeeded in the Court of Appeal.. CA 474/06 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
7 March 2007
____________________________
Appeal and Cross Appeal dismissed.
Order of Court of Appeal remitting the proceeding to the Employment Court stands.
Costs to appellant $25,000 plus disbursements.
Order for Costs in Court of Appeal stands.
14 November 2007
7 March 2007
____________________________
Appeal and Cross Appeal dismissed.
Order of Court of Appeal remitting the proceeding to the Employment Court stands.
Costs to appellant $25,000 plus disbursements.
Order for Costs in Court of Appeal stands.
14 November 2007
Transcripts
- Hearing date 13 and 14 June 2007 SC 91/2006 (PDF, 485 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 89 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Southbourne Investments Limited v Greenmount Manufacturing Limited
Case number
SC 96/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – option in deed of lease to purchase the relevant land - lessee’s purported exercise of option rejected by lessor because the exercise allegedly failed to conform with terms of the option – Court of Appeal, applying the Reporoa Stores “exact compliance” test, held that the option was validly exercised – whether the Court of Appeal in substance applied the “exact compliance” test – whether there was in fact “exact compliance” with the terms of the option. CA 90/06 21 November 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
20 April 2007
___________________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders for summary judgment and specific performance are set aside.
The proceeding is remitted to the High Court.
The appellant is awarded costs in this Court of $13,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appellant is awarded costs in that Court of $3,000.
2 August 2007
20 April 2007
___________________________
The appeal is allowed and the orders for summary judgment and specific performance are set aside.
The proceeding is remitted to the High Court.
The appellant is awarded costs in this Court of $13,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
The costs order in the Court of Appeal is set aside. The appellant is awarded costs in that Court of $3,000.
2 August 2007
Transcripts
- Hearing date 16 April 2007 (PDF, 138 KB)
Media Releases
- mediarelease southbourneinvestments 000 (PDF, 88 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Additional document
Transcript Hearing date 28 June 2007 (PDF, 346 KB)
Substantive judgment
Page 74 of 78