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.
3 July 2026
Case information summary (as at 3 July 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 88 KB)
Case information summary (as at 3 July 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 127 KB)
All years
Case name
Meryl Taimania Carter, Raina Raewyn Doar, Raymond Paul Edmonds, Jonathon Pearce Edwards, Anita Lee Marsh, Taipari Barry Phillip Munro and Witiao Raewyn Paul, Trustees of Whatitiri Maori Reserves Trust and New Zealand Maori Council v Attornet-General and N
Case number
SC 19/2026
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Date of Judgment
01 January 2026
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Case name
Barry John Bailey v The King
Case number
SC 120/2024
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (R v Bailey [2024] NZCA 552).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal.
5 March 2025
__________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The application under s 147 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2011 is remitted to the District Court for rehearing.
30 March 2026
Date of hearing
16 July 2025
Judges
Glazebrook, Ellen France, Williams, Kós and Miller JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 16 July 2025 Appellant Submissions (PDF, 987 KB)
- Hearing date 16 July 2025 Respondent submissions (PDF, 1.1 MB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 16 July 2025 Transcript (PDF, 435 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 16 July 2025 Case Synopsis (PDF, 452 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2026] NZSC 20 (PDF, 271 KB)
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
BAILEY v R [2025] NZSC 10 [5 March 2025] (PDF, 136 KB)
Substantive judgment
BAILEY v R [2026] NZSC 20 [30 March 2026] (PDF, 354 KB)
Case name
Barry Bai and Caoping Ding v Thomas Edmund William James and Iain McLennan, Keaton Pronk and McDonald Vague Limited
Case number
SC 1/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay two sets of costs of $2,500, one to the first respondent and the other to the second respondents.
25 March 2022
_________________________________________________
A The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 25 March 2022 (Ding v James [2022] NZSC 28) is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal in SC 36/2022 is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
11 May 2022
B The applicants must pay two sets of costs of $2,500, one to the first respondent and the other to the second respondents.
25 March 2022
_________________________________________________
A The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 25 March 2022 (Ding v James [2022] NZSC 28) is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal in SC 36/2022 is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
11 May 2022
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Case name
Port Otago Limited v Environmental Defence Society Incorporated, Otago Regional Council, Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand Incorporated and Marlborough District Council
Case number
SC 6/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Port Otago Ltd v Environmental Defence Society Inc [2021] NZCA 638).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
17 March 2022
______________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The order remitting the matter to the Environment Court is set aside.
C The Otago Regional Council is directed to consult the parties and any other persons it considers appropriate on a redrafted policy 4.3.7(d)–(e) in the proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement either:
(a) along the lines in paragraph [87] of this judgment or to similar effect; or
(b) otherwise to give appropriate effect to the policies of the NZCPS and their inter-relationships.
D Costs are reserved.
24 August 2023
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
17 March 2022
______________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The order remitting the matter to the Environment Court is set aside.
C The Otago Regional Council is directed to consult the parties and any other persons it considers appropriate on a redrafted policy 4.3.7(d)–(e) in the proposed Otago Regional Policy Statement either:
(a) along the lines in paragraph [87] of this judgment or to similar effect; or
(b) otherwise to give appropriate effect to the policies of the NZCPS and their inter-relationships.
D Costs are reserved.
24 August 2023
Date of hearing
11 May 2022
- 12 May 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Appellant Port Otago submissions (PDF, 7.5 MB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Appellant Port Otago oral outline (PDF, 747 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 First Respondent EDS submissions (PDF, 861 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Second Respondent ORC submissions (PDF, 335 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Second Respondent ORC oral outline (PDF, 693 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Third Respondent FB submissions (PDF, 855 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Fourth Respondent MDC submissions (PDF, 998 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party FB submissions (PDF, 671 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party NZTA submissions (PDF, 997 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party NZTA oral outline (PDF, 1 MB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party Auckland Council submissions (PDF, 9.2 MB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party Mana Whenua Parties submissions (PDF, 815 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party Mana Whenua Parties oral outline (PDF, 650 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party Ngati Whatua Orakei submissions (PDF, 695 KB)
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 Interested Party Ngati Whatua Orakei oral outline (PDF, 705 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing 11 and 12 May 2022 (PDF, 867 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 11 and 12 May 2022 (PDF, 198 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 112 (PDF, 326 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Robert Roper v Mariya Ann Taylor and Attorney-General
Case number
SC 16/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Taylor v Roper [2020] NZCA 268 reissued 16 December 2021 and Taylor v Roper [2021] NZCA 691).
B Leave to the First Respondent to cross appeal is granted.
17 May 2022
______________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We uphold the conclusion of the High Court Judge dismissing the claim by Ms Taylor for compensatory damages in relation to false imprisonment.
B The cross appeal is dismissed.
C Costs are reserved.
12 May 2023
______________________________________________
A There are no costs orders in this Court.
B Costs in the Courts below are to be dealt with by those Courts.
4 July 2023
B Leave to the First Respondent to cross appeal is granted.
17 May 2022
______________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We uphold the conclusion of the High Court Judge dismissing the claim by Ms Taylor for compensatory damages in relation to false imprisonment.
B The cross appeal is dismissed.
C Costs are reserved.
12 May 2023
______________________________________________
A There are no costs orders in this Court.
B Costs in the Courts below are to be dealt with by those Courts.
4 July 2023
Date of hearing
05 October 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Williams and William Young JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Appellant submissions A G (PDF, 538 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Attorney General submissions on cross appeal (PDF, 293 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Appellants Submissions Roper (PDF, 280 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Cross Appellants Submissions in opposition to the Submissions of the Attorney General (PDF, 121 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Cross Appellants Submissions Opposing Submissions of Roper (PDF, 111 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 First Respondent Cross Appellant Outline of Oral Argument (PDF, 679 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Attorney General Outline of Oral Argument (PDF, 804 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 (PDF, 405 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 5 October - 6 October 2022 (PDF, 688 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 49 (PDF, 250 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
Attorney-General v Mariya Ann Taylor and Robert Roper
Case number
SC 23/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Taylor v Roper [2020] NZCA 268 reissued 16 December 2021 and Taylor v Roper [2021] NZCA 691).
B Leave to the First Respondent to cross appeal is granted.
17 May 2022
________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We uphold the conclusion of the High Court Judge dismissing the claim by Ms Taylor for compensatory damages in relation to false imprisonment.
B The cross appeal is dismissed.
C Costs are reserved.
12 May 2023
________________________________________________________
A There are no costs orders in this Court.
B Costs in the Courts below are to be dealt with by those Courts.
4 July 2023
B Leave to the First Respondent to cross appeal is granted.
17 May 2022
________________________________________________________
A The appeal is allowed. We uphold the conclusion of the High Court Judge dismissing the claim by Ms Taylor for compensatory damages in relation to false imprisonment.
B The cross appeal is dismissed.
C Costs are reserved.
12 May 2023
________________________________________________________
A There are no costs orders in this Court.
B Costs in the Courts below are to be dealt with by those Courts.
4 July 2023
Date of hearing
05 October 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Williams and William Young JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Appellant submissions A G (PDF, 538 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Attorney General submissions on cross appeal (PDF, 293 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Appellants Submissions Roper (PDF, 280 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Cross Appellants Submissions in opposition to the Submissions of the Attorney General (PDF, 121 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Cross Appellants Submissions Opposing Submissions of Roper (PDF, 111 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 First Respondent Cross Appellant Outline of Oral Argument (PDF, 679 KB)
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 Attorney General Outline of Oral Argument (PDF, 804 KB)
Transcripts
- Hearing date 5 October 2022 (PDF, 405 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 5 October - 6 October 2022 (PDF, 688 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 49 (PDF, 250 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
Barry Bai and Caoping Ding v Thomas Edmund William James and Iain McLennan, Keaton Pronk and McDonald Vague Limited
Case number
SC 36/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 25 March 2022 (Ding v James [2022] NZSC 28) is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal in SC 36/2022 is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
11 May 2022
B The application for leave to appeal in SC 36/2022 is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
11 May 2022
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Steven Richard Young v Attorney-General
Case number
SC 98/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Young v Attorney-General [2022] NZCA 391).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
14 December 2022
__________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
30 October 2023
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
14 December 2022
__________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellant must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
30 October 2023
Date of hearing
14 March 2023
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing 14 March 2023 Appellant submissions (PDF, 1.5 MB)
- Hearing 14 March 2023 Appellant oral outline (PDF, 711 KB)
- Hearing 14 March 2023 Respondent submissions (PDF, 3.7 MB)
Transcripts
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 142 (PDF, 288 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Jinyue Young And Anor v Zie Zhang
Case number
SC 134/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 28 March 2018 (Ying v Zhang [2018] NZSC 27) is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
2 May 2023
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 28 March 2018 (Ying v Zhang [2018] NZSC 27) is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
2 May 2023
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JINYUE YOUNG v ZIE ZHANG [2023] NZSC 44 [2 May 2023] (PDF, 202 KB)
Case name
Donglin Deng v Lu Zheng
Case number
SC 5/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Zheng v Deng [2020] NZCA 614).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to make a declaration that there was a partnership between Mr Zheng and Mr Deng in which they were equal partners and to make orders that were consequential on that finding.
14 May 2021
_________________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Mr Deng must pay Mr Zheng costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements (including travelling expenses for two counsel), to be fixed by the Registrar if necessary.
20 June 2022
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to make a declaration that there was a partnership between Mr Zheng and Mr Deng in which they were equal partners and to make orders that were consequential on that finding.
14 May 2021
_________________________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Mr Deng must pay Mr Zheng costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements (including travelling expenses for two counsel), to be fixed by the Registrar if necessary.
20 June 2022
Date of hearing
17 August 2021
Judges
William Young, Glazebrook, O’Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 17 August 2021 (PDF, 553 KB)
Media Releases
- MR 2022 NZSC 76 (PDF, 334 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
DONGLIN DENG v LU ZHENG [2021] NZSC 43 [14 May 2021] (PDF, 200 KB)
Substantive judgment
DONGLIN DENG v LU ZHENG [2022] NZSC 76 [20 June 2022] (PDF, 503 KB)
Page 1 of 9