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
Jiawen Mao v Hyun Bin Kim and Duk Young Lee
Case number
SC 79/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500.
21 September 2021
B The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500.
21 September 2021
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Case name
Wairarapa Moana Ki Pouākani Incorporation v Mercury NZ Limited and The Waitangi Tribunal and Ors
Case number
SC 93/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A The applications for extensions of time to apply for leave to appeal in SC 93/2021 and SC 127/2021 are granted.
B Leave to appeal in SC 93/2021 and SC 127/2021 is granted (Mercury NZ Ltd v The Waitangi Tribunal [2021] NZHC 654).
C The approved question in each appeal is whether the High Court’s decision was correct.
11 October 2021
_________________________________________________________
A We extend time for the first respondent to apply for leave to cross-appeal in SC 93/2021.
B We grant leave to the first respondent in SC 93/2021 to cross-appeal.
C The approved question is whether the High Court’s decision on the first respondent’s claim in that Court was correct.
15 December 2021
________________________________________________________
A The appeal by Wairarapa Moana ki Pouākani Inc in SC 93/2021 is allowed in part. The High Court’s ruling that the Waitangi Tribunal has no power to recommend resumption in favour of a claimant without mana whenua is set aside. The appeal is otherwise dismissed.
B The appeal by Ryshell Griggs and Mark Chamberlain in SC 127/2021 and the cross-appeal by Mercury NZ Limited in SC 93/2021 are dismissed.
C Issues as to costs may be dealt with by memoranda if they are not otherwise agreed. Memoranda will be no longer than five pages and must be filed and served within 20 working days.
7 December 2022
B Leave to appeal in SC 93/2021 and SC 127/2021 is granted (Mercury NZ Ltd v The Waitangi Tribunal [2021] NZHC 654).
C The approved question in each appeal is whether the High Court’s decision was correct.
11 October 2021
_________________________________________________________
A We extend time for the first respondent to apply for leave to cross-appeal in SC 93/2021.
B We grant leave to the first respondent in SC 93/2021 to cross-appeal.
C The approved question is whether the High Court’s decision on the first respondent’s claim in that Court was correct.
15 December 2021
________________________________________________________
A The appeal by Wairarapa Moana ki Pouākani Inc in SC 93/2021 is allowed in part. The High Court’s ruling that the Waitangi Tribunal has no power to recommend resumption in favour of a claimant without mana whenua is set aside. The appeal is otherwise dismissed.
B The appeal by Ryshell Griggs and Mark Chamberlain in SC 127/2021 and the cross-appeal by Mercury NZ Limited in SC 93/2021 are dismissed.
C Issues as to costs may be dealt with by memoranda if they are not otherwise agreed. Memoranda will be no longer than five pages and must be filed and served within 20 working days.
7 December 2022
Date of hearing
09 February 2022
- 10 February 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan and Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 1 October 2021 (PDF, 310 KB)
- Hearing date 9 - 10 February 2022 (PDF, 1 MB)
Media Releases
- MR [2022] NZSC 142 (PDF, 276 KB)
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Christopher Ryan v Health and Disability Commissioner
Case number
SC 98/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Ryan v The Health and Disability Commissioner [2021] NZCA 347).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to uphold the finding of liability under s 72 of the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994.
2 November 2021
________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
28 April 2023
________________________________________________
The appellant must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
26 June 2023
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to uphold the finding of liability under s 72 of the Health and Disability Commissioner Act 1994.
2 November 2021
________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
28 April 2023
________________________________________________
The appellant must pay the respondent costs of $25,000 plus usual disbursements.
26 June 2023
Date of hearing
24 March 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing 24 March 2022 (PDF, 433 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 42 (PDF, 286 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
Ryshell Griggs and Mark Phillip Chamberlain on Behalf of Ngāi Tūmapūhia-ā-Rangi Hapū v Waitangi Tribunal and Ors
Case number
SC 127/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A The applications for extensions of time to apply for leave to appeal in SC 93/2021 and SC 127/2021 are granted.
B Leave to appeal in SC 93/2021 and SC 127/2021 is granted (Mercury NZ Ltd v The Waitangi Tribunal [2021] NZHC 654).
C The approved question in each appeal is whether the High Court’s decision was correct.
11 October 2021
_______________________________________________________
A The appeal by Wairarapa Moana ki Pouākani Inc in SC 93/2021 is allowed in part. The High Court’s ruling that the Waitangi Tribunal has no power to recommend resumption in favour of a claimant without mana whenua is set aside. The appeal is otherwise dismissed.
B The appeal by Ryshell Griggs and Mark Chamberlain in SC 127/2021 and the cross-appeal by Mercury NZ Limited in SC 93/2021 are dismissed.
C Issues as to costs may be dealt with by memoranda if they are not otherwise agreed. Memoranda will be no longer than five pages and must be filed and served within 20 working days.
7 December 2022
B Leave to appeal in SC 93/2021 and SC 127/2021 is granted (Mercury NZ Ltd v The Waitangi Tribunal [2021] NZHC 654).
C The approved question in each appeal is whether the High Court’s decision was correct.
11 October 2021
_______________________________________________________
A The appeal by Wairarapa Moana ki Pouākani Inc in SC 93/2021 is allowed in part. The High Court’s ruling that the Waitangi Tribunal has no power to recommend resumption in favour of a claimant without mana whenua is set aside. The appeal is otherwise dismissed.
B The appeal by Ryshell Griggs and Mark Chamberlain in SC 127/2021 and the cross-appeal by Mercury NZ Limited in SC 93/2021 are dismissed.
C Issues as to costs may be dealt with by memoranda if they are not otherwise agreed. Memoranda will be no longer than five pages and must be filed and served within 20 working days.
7 December 2022
Date of hearing
09 February 2022
- 10 February 2022
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan and Williams JJ
Media Releases
- MR [2022] NZSC 142 (PDF, 276 KB)
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Christine Marama Cowan and Te Rahui John Cowan v John Arthur Cowan, Kurt Thomas Gibbons and 170 Queens Drive Limited.
Case number
SC 130/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Cowan v Cowan [2021] NZCA 463).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal to that Court.
20 December 2021
___________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
12 April 2022
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal to that Court.
20 December 2021
___________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
12 April 2022
Date of hearing
15 February 2022
Judges
Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France, Williams, JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 15 December 2021 (PDF, 214 KB)
- Hearing date 15 February 2022 (PDF, 276 KB)
Media Releases
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Woolworths New Zealand Limited v Auckland Council, Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority, Foodstuffs North Island Limited and Medical Officer of Health
Case number
SC 139/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Auckland Council v Woolworths New Zealand Ltd [2021] NZCA 484).
B Leave is granted to the Medical Officer of Health to appear as an interested party at the substantive hearing.
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal and dismiss the cross-appeal.
13 April 2022
______________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellants must pay the Auckland Council costs of $35,000.
5 May 2023
B Leave is granted to the Medical Officer of Health to appear as an interested party at the substantive hearing.
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal and dismiss the cross-appeal.
13 April 2022
______________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellants must pay the Auckland Council costs of $35,000.
5 May 2023
Date of hearing
13 September 2022
- 14 September 2022
Judges
O'Regan, Ellen France, Williams and William Young JJ; Cooper P
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing 13 and 14 September 2022 Appellant submissions (PDF, 428 KB)
- Hearing 13 and 14 September 2022 First respondent submissions (PDF, 982 KB)
- Hearing Tuesday 13 September and Wednesday 14 September 2022 Interested party submissions (PDF, 1 MB)
- Hearing 13 and 14 September 2022 Joint Chronology (PDF, 200 KB)
- Hearing date Tue 13 Sept and Wed 14 Sept 2022 Woolworths outline of oral argument (PDF, 144 KB)
- Hearing date Tue 13 Sept and Wed 14 Sept 2022 Auckland Council oral outline (PDF, 1011 KB)
Transcripts
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 13 Sept and 14 Sept 2022 (PDF, 300 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 45 (PDF, 284 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Videos
- Woolworths New Zealand Ltd v Auckland Council SC 139/2021 & SC 140/2021 - 14 September 2022 (Recorded, 14 September 2022)
- Woolworths New Zealand ltd v Auckland Council SC 139/2021 & SC 140/2021- 13 September 2022 (Recorded, 13 September 2022)
Case name
Foodstuffs North Island Limited v Auckland Council, Woolworths New Zealand Limited and Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority
Case number
SC 140/2021
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Auckland Council v Woolworths New Zealand Ltd [2021] NZCA 484).
B Leave is granted to the Medical Officer of Health to appear as an interested party at the substantive hearing.
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal and dismiss the cross-appeal.
13 April 2022
_____________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellants must pay the Auckland Council costs of $35,000.
5 May 2023
B Leave is granted to the Medical Officer of Health to appear as an interested party at the substantive hearing.
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal and dismiss the cross-appeal.
13 April 2022
_____________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The appellants must pay the Auckland Council costs of $35,000.
5 May 2023
Date of hearing
13 September 2022
- 14 September 2022
Judges
O'Regan, Ellen France, Williams and William Young JJ; Cooper P
Submissions from counsel
- Hearing Tuesday 13 Sept Wed 14 Sept 2022 Appellant submissions (PDF, 390 KB)
- Hearing Tue 13 and Wed 14 Sept 2022 First respondent submissions (PDF, 841 KB)
- Hearing Tuesday 13 September and Wednesday 14 September 2022 Interested party submissions (PDF, 1 MB)
- Hearing 13 and 14 September 2022 Joint Chronology (PDF, 200 KB)
- Hearing date Tue 13 Sept and Wed 14 Sept 2022 Woolworths outline of oral argument (PDF, 144 KB)
- Hearing date Tue 13 Sept and Wed 14 Sept 2022 Auckland Council oral outline (PDF, 1011 KB)
Transcripts
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 13 Sept and 14 Sept 2022 (PDF, 300 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2023] NZSC 45 (PDF, 284 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Videos
- Woolworths New Zealand Ltd v Auckland Council SC 139/2021 & SC 140/2021 - 14 September 2022 (Recorded, 14 September 2022)
- Woolworths New Zealand ltd v Auckland Council SC 139/2021 & SC 140/2021- 13 September 2022 (Recorded, 13 September 2022)
Case name
Leslie Norman Austin v Roche Products (New Zealand) Limited
Case number
SC 5/2020
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted in part (Roche Products (New Zealand) Ltd v Austin [2019] NZCA 660).
B The approved question is whether the applicant’s claim for compensatory damages should have been struck out on the basis that his injuries were not an ordinary consequence of the consumption of Roaccutane.
C The application for leave to appeal is otherwise dismissed.
19 May 2020
___________________________________________________
A The appeal will be dismissed one month from the date of this judgment unless the appellant makes an application under s 135 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 together with an application to this Court for a stay of this proceeding pending completion of that process.
B There is no order as to costs.
31 March 2021
___________________________________________________
A This Court’s decision in Austin v Roche Products (New Zealand) Ltd [2021] NZSC 30 is stayed until midday on 6 December 2021, unless the stay is extended in this Court on the application of Mr Austin.
B Any party may seek an order lapsing the stay at any stage.
C Costs are reserved.
16 June 2021
___________________________________________________
A The stay ordered in Austin v Roche Products (New Zealand) Ltd [2021] NZSC 62 is lifted.
B The appeal is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
25 September 2024
B The approved question is whether the applicant’s claim for compensatory damages should have been struck out on the basis that his injuries were not an ordinary consequence of the consumption of Roaccutane.
C The application for leave to appeal is otherwise dismissed.
19 May 2020
___________________________________________________
A The appeal will be dismissed one month from the date of this judgment unless the appellant makes an application under s 135 of the Accident Compensation Act 2001 together with an application to this Court for a stay of this proceeding pending completion of that process.
B There is no order as to costs.
31 March 2021
___________________________________________________
A This Court’s decision in Austin v Roche Products (New Zealand) Ltd [2021] NZSC 30 is stayed until midday on 6 December 2021, unless the stay is extended in this Court on the application of Mr Austin.
B Any party may seek an order lapsing the stay at any stage.
C Costs are reserved.
16 June 2021
___________________________________________________
A The stay ordered in Austin v Roche Products (New Zealand) Ltd [2021] NZSC 62 is lifted.
B The appeal is dismissed.
C There is no order as to costs.
25 September 2024
Date of hearing
10 September 2020
Judges
William Young, Glazebrook, O’Regan, Ellen France, Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 10 September 2020 (PDF, 225 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2021] NZSC 30 (PDF, 281 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Recall judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
Trans-Tasman Resources Limited v The Taranaki-Whanganui Conservation Board and Ors
Case number
SC 28/2020
Summary
Civil appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Trans-Tasman Resources Ltd v Taranaki Whanganui Conservation Board [2020] NZCA 86).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
17 July 2020
____________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Leave is reserved to a party to apply to the High Court for directions if necessary.
C Costs are reserved.
30 September 2021
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal.
17 July 2020
____________________________________________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B Leave is reserved to a party to apply to the High Court for directions if necessary.
C Costs are reserved.
30 September 2021
Date of hearing
17 November 2020
- 19 November 2020
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 17-19 November 2020 (PDF, 1.3 MB)
Media Releases
- MR [2021] NZSC 127 (PDF, 193 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Case name
William Allan Berkland v The King
Case number
SC 40/2020
Summary
Criminal Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Berkland v R [2020] NZCA 150)
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal's decision was correct.
17 November 2020
___________________________________________________________
A Mr Berkland’s appeal in SC 40/2020 is allowed. His sentence of 12 years and nine months’ imprisonment, together with a 50 per cent MPI, is quashed, and a sentence of eight years and eight months’ imprisonment is substituted.
B Mr Harding’s appeal in SC 64/2020 is allowed. His sentence of 28 and a half years is quashed, and a new sentence of 21 years is substituted. There is no adjustment to the MPI.
7 December 2022
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal's decision was correct.
17 November 2020
___________________________________________________________
A Mr Berkland’s appeal in SC 40/2020 is allowed. His sentence of 12 years and nine months’ imprisonment, together with a 50 per cent MPI, is quashed, and a sentence of eight years and eight months’ imprisonment is substituted.
B Mr Harding’s appeal in SC 64/2020 is allowed. His sentence of 28 and a half years is quashed, and a new sentence of 21 years is substituted. There is no adjustment to the MPI.
7 December 2022
Date of hearing
23 March 2021
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 23 - 24 March 2021 (PDF, 799 KB)
Case Synopses
- Hearing date 23 March 2021 (PDF, 288 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2022] NZSC 143 (PDF, 261 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Page 3 of 9