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.
20 March 2026
Case information summary 2025 (as at 20 March 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 88 KB)
Case information summary 2025 (as at 20 March 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 123 KB)
All years
Case name
Gail Denise Maney v The Queen
Case number
SC 2/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – application in Court of Appeal to admit fresh evidence – key witness implicating applicant at trial recanting evidence before Court of Appeal on the basis that it had been coerced by Police conduct – witness not considered credible by Court of Appeal – whether retrial ought to be granted in order for credibility of witness to be considered with totality of remaining evidence – application for leave to appeal out of time. CA 244/03 11 August 2005
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 1 May 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter William Russel v The Queen
Case number
SC 3/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act. CA 475/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
29 May 2007
_____________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenes.
29 May 2007
_____________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenes.
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Peter Michael Connolly v The Queen
Case number
SC 4/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act. CA 472/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. Application for leave to cross appeal dismissed.
29 May 2007
___________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenses.
29 May 2007
___________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Costs to appellant in Supreme Court, $20,000 together with reasonable expenses.
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
Kevin Jack Ngan v The Queen
Case number
SC 5/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction – earlier unsuccessful application for leave to appeal directly to Supreme Court (see SC 24/2006) – lawfulness of “inventory searches” – admissibility of evidence obtained through police searches of applicant’s sunglasses pouch and wallet following injury of applicant in car crash – whether Court of Appeal erred in holding that searches both lawful and reasonable and evidence therefore properly admitted. CA 220/06 1 December 2006
Result
Leave to appeal granted. 15 March 2007
Media Releases
- pressreleasengan 000 (PDF, 78 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
NGAN v R SC 5/2007 [13 December 2007] (PDF, 195 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Alan Ivo Greer v The Queen
Case number
SC 6/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – Bail Act 2000 – convictions for sexual offences and disqualification from driving – application for bail pending hearing of appeals – application rejected by Court of Appeal, citing lack of change of circumstances since previous application and ongoing risk to safety of public and of victims –allegations of bias and predetermination against Court of Appeal and of improper conduct by various officials of the justice system. CA 179/06 21 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 16 May 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
CA judgment
Case name
John Donald Currie v The Queen
Case number
SC 7/2007
Summary
Criminal – Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1967 – trial Judge awarded costs to defendants acquitted on charges of conspiracy to defraud and money laundering brought by Serious Fraud Office – Court of Appeal majority held that High Court Judge had erred in failing to take account of risk of a substantial award inhibiting the exercise of proper prosecutorial function – whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the cost award because it was “disproportionate” – whether Court of Appeal wrongly interpreted s 5(1) of the Act.CA 473/2005 6 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted. Application for leave to cross appeal dismissed.
29 May 2007
_________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
In Supreme Court, reasonable expenses as may be fixed by the Registrar.
14 November 2007
29 May 2007
_________________________
Appeal allowed, Costs order in the High Court reinstated.
Costs to appellant in Court of Appeal, $12,000 together with reasonable expenses.
In Supreme Court, reasonable expenses as may be fixed by the Registrar.
14 November 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
REID And Ors V R SC 95/2006 [29 May 2007] (PDF, 17 KB)
Substantive judgment / Media release
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Case name
Laxman Rajamani v the Queen
Case number
SC 8/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – murder – husband killed wife – defence of lack of murderous intent and provocation – husband and wife both Indian - alleged provocative act by wife was in threatening to leave her husband for a Pakistani colleague – whether trial judge erred in proceeding with the trial to verdict with only ten jurors after two jurors had been discharged – whether trial judge erred in summing up on provocation – whether defence counsel’s cross-examination of a key Crown witness was inadequate; and whether trial judge’s summing up with respect to that witness was unbalanced – whether hearsay evidence from deceased a few days before her death concerning threats to her life from the defendant should have been admitted under R v Manase [2001] 2 NZLR 197; and whether trial judge’ s instructions as to the use to which that evidence could be put were incorrect. CA 140/06 20 December 2006
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
19 April 2007
____________________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed, new trial ordered.
23 August 2007
19 April 2007
____________________________
Appeal allowed, conviction quashed, new trial ordered.
23 August 2007
Transcripts
- Hearing date 25 July 2007 (PDF, 321 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
RAJAMANI v R SC 8/2007 [19 April 2007] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
RAJAMANI v R SC 8/2007 [23 August 2007] (PDF, 38 KB)
Case name
Alan Ivo Greer v The Parole Board at Auckland Prison and others
Case number
SC 9/2007
Summary
Civil Appeal – Appeal against decision to refuse writ of habeas corpus – whether there was misconduct by public officials – whether the Court of Appeal erred in accepting and acting on contested evidence.CA 271/06 21 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 7 March 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Paul Bruce Emirali v The Queen
Case number
SC 10/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – appellant convicted of conspiracy to supply cocaine – whether verdict supportable on the evidence – meaning of “conspiracy” and “supply” – admissibility of evidence –application for leave to appeal out of time. CA 177/06 12 December 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
2 May 2007
2 May 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
EMIRALI v R SC 10/2007 [2 May 2007] (PDF, 15 KB)
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Manu Chhotubhai Bhanabhai and Douglas Mark Andrew Burgress v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 11/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – as part of an agreement to settle GST arrears arising from the development of an apartment complex, solicitors for property developers gave an undertaking to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue that arrears would be cleared using proceeds from the sale of certain apartment units – in the event, GST arrears not paid – property developers put into liquidation - liquidators commenced proceedings, to which Commissioner was party, against the directors for reckless trading – proceedings settled in favour of liquidators with large cash payment, although no portion of payment could be applied towards the debt owed to the Commissioner – in separate proceedings, giving rise to present application, Commissioner awarded compensation against solicitors in their personal capacity for breach of undertaking – whether factual findings and reasoning at first instance were incorrect - whether the Court of Appeal erred in treatment of certain evidence going towards the nature of the undertaking – whether, given the antecedent proceedings by the liquidators, the claim by the Commissioner amounted to an abuse of process. CA 218/05 20 December 2006
Result
Leave to appeal dismissed. 26 April 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 243 of 273