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.

17 August 2026

Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 128 KB) 

All years

Case name
Alana Glenys-May Thomas  v The Queen
Case number
SC 11/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal from decision of the Court of Appeal allowing the admission of certain evidence at trial – Police executing a search warrant obtained the evidence through a search of an apartment – Applicant pleaded guilty to variety of drug-related offences – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the police search warrant was lawful and the evidence lawfully and properly obtained – Whether the Court of Appeal should have given greater weight to the breach of s 198 of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 in determining whether the evidence should have been admitted.[2008] NZCA 4352  CA 81/2008  8 September 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
7 April 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Westpac Banking Corporation, Bank of New Zealand Limited, ANZ National Bank Limited v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 83/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Banking and Finance – Unclaimed Money Act 1971 – meaning of terms: “money” “payable”, “has become owing” – Whether UMA applies to conditional transactional liabilities such as cheques, drafts or other bills of exchange – Bills of Exchange Act 1908 – nature of drawer’s liability – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding Commissioner of Inland Revenue v Thomas Cook (New Zealand) Ltd [2005] 2 NZLR 722 (PC) applied – Whether Thomas Cook rightly decided.[2009] NZCA 376   CA 741/2008   26 August 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
4 December 2009
__________________________________
The appeal is dismissed. The appellants are ordered to pay the respondent costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar.
7 April 2011
Case name
Ghlenn Thomas Douglas Gollop  v The Queen
Case number
SC 104/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against sentence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding without evidence to the required standard that the quantum of manufacture was 250g which materially effected the level of sentence in terms of s 24 of the Sentencing Act 2002 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the minimum term of imprisonment was justified when the appellant was not represented by counsel at sentencing, contrary to s 30 of the Sentencing Act 2002.[2009] NZCA 486    CA  162/200  19 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
17 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Mana PropertyTrustee Ltd v James Development Ltd
Case number
SC 105/2009
Summary
Civil – Interpreting terms of a sale and purchase agreement  – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by equating non-performance at the time of settlement with an automatic right to cancel – Whether the Court of Appeal were wrong to find that clause 18.3 of the agreement for sale and purchase was essential.[2009] NZCA 483    CA  241/2000  19 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 March 2010
______________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the respondent’ s purported cancellation on 3 November 2008 of its contract with the appellant was of no effect.  The proceeding is remitted to the High Court for outstanding issues to be determined in light of this judgment.  The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. Costs are reserved.  Counsel should file memoranda. 
23 July 2010
Case name
Janice Mary Menere v Jackson Mews Management Limited
Case number
SC 121/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Property Law Act 1952, s 81 – Property Law Act 2007, s 97 – Unit Titles – Mortgages – Whether relevant form of encumbrances can ever be discharged - Whether encumbrances in question ought to be discharged – Whether Court of Appeal was wrong to decide that the rights of the intended appellant to redemption under s 81 of the Property Law Act 1952 had been taken away by the repeal of the Act.[2009] NZCA 563 CA 690/2009   27 November 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 16 April 2010
Case name
Neville James Gibson v Minter Ellison Rudd Watts
Case number
SC 8/2008
Summary
Civil Appeal – proceedings against former legal counsel - whether the Court of Appeal made accurate findings of fact – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the respondent had complied with discovery obligations – whether the Court of Appeal had regard to all relevant evidence – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to find that the applicant would not have been entitled to legal aid in earlier proceedings against a third party – whether the respondent had a conflict of interest in earlier proceedings - whether the Court should have considered the applicant’ s financial position when awarding costs against him[2007] NZCA 595 CA 202/065, CA 33/06 21 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2.500 to respondent. 1 May 2008
Case name
Wayne Thomas Patterson v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2008
Summary
[Criminal – sentencing appeal – whether sentence manifestly excessive – the appropriate starting point for serious fraud – whether recovery of funds, under the Proceeds of Crimes Act 1991 or by any other way short of voluntary reparation, should be recognised in sentencing – the admissibility of extraneous material from a Victim Impact Statement under s 9 Evidence Act 2006, and its relationship with the provisions of the Sentencing Act 2002 – relevance, and proof, of overseas convictions in sentencing.[2008] NZCA 75 CA 573/07 31 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
28 August 2008.
Case name
Christopher James Fullbeck Mosley v The Queen
Case number
SC 58/2008
Summary
Criminal appeal – trial took place with ten jurors – whether the Court of Appeal erred in confirming that there were “exceptional circumstances relating to the trial” which justified continuing with ten jurors under s 374 Crimes Act 1961 – whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to conclude that s 374(8) excluded a right to review the trial Judge’ s decision to discharge the 12th and 11th jurors.[2008] NZCA 319  CA 612/2007     25 August 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal dismissed.

17 November 2008.

Case name
James Hemi Biddle  v The Queen
Case number
SC 82/2008
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Robbery – Criminal Procedure – Judge’s summing up – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up to jury on issues of credibility and reliability was appropriate – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding trial Judge’s summing up did not give rise to miscarriage of justice.[2008] NZCA 398  CA 243/2008   30 September 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Dates

Application for leave to appeal refused.

5 December 2008.

 Hearing

7 July 2009

 Result
Appeal dismissed.

16 July 2009

Case name
James Michael Leuluaiali’i v The Queen
Case number
SC 1/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – appellant convicted as party to attempted murder and murder – appeal by a co-accused had been allowed on grounds of error in summing up in relation to parties; like errors in present case – appeal allowed in relation to attempted murder – in relation to murder the proviso to s 385(1) applied and appeal dismissed – whether application of the proviso led to a substantial miscarriage of justice. CA 122/06 22 November 2006
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 30 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed