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
Westpac Banking Corporation v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue and others
Case number
SC 66/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – disclosure of documents in tax avoidance litigation – Commissioner of Inland Revenue is challenging on grounds of sham and illegitimate tax avoidance several structured financing arrangements entered into by a number of banks – litigation is to proceed against each bank separately – whether, in litigation against each bank, the Commissioner can rely on documents associated with similar transactions entered into by other banks – whether such reliance is prevented by either s 81 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 or the application of public interest immunity. CA 280/06 [2007] NZCA 356 CA 280/0621 August 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 October 2007 ________________________ The appeals are dismissed with costs to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar, and to be borne as to 40% each by Westpac and ANZ National and as to 20% by ASB Bank.
18 October 2007 ________________________ The appeals are dismissed with costs to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar, and to be borne as to 40% each by Westpac and ANZ National and as to 20% by ASB Bank.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Judgment appealed from
Case name
ANZ National Bank Limited, UDC Finance Limited and Tui Endeavour Limited v The Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 67/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – disclosure of documents in tax avoidance litigation – Commissioner of Inland Revenue is challenging on grounds of sham and illegitimate tax avoidance several structured financing arrangements entered into by a number of banks – litigation is to proceed against each bank separately – whether, in litigation against each bank, the Commissioner can rely on documents associated with similar transactions entered into by other banks – whether such reliance is prevented by either s 81 of the Tax Administration Act 1994 or the application of public interest immunity. CA 280/06 [2007] NZCA 356 CA 280/06 21 August 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 October 2007
_________________________
The appeals are dismissed with costs to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar, and to be borne as to 40% each by Westpac and ANZ National and as to 20% by ASB Bank.
14 April 2008
18 October 2007
_________________________
The appeals are dismissed with costs to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue of $25,000 together with reasonable disbursements, to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar, and to be borne as to 40% each by Westpac and ANZ National and as to 20% by ASB Bank.
14 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment / Media release
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Case name
Lisa Kathryn Cropp v A Judicial Committee & Bryan Francis McKenzie
Case number
SC 68/2007
Summary
Civil – judicial review – respondents instituted disciplinary proceedings after applicant, a jockey, tested positive for controlled drugs – applicant invoking rights to bodily integrity, to avoid self-incrimination and to be free from unreasonable search and seizure – application of New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – whether regulatory requirement that jockeys consent to random drug testing as condition of obtaining and retaining a jockey’s licence authorised by s 29 Racing Act 2003 – whether applicant consented to drug testing – whether prescribed procedure and requirements for drug testing lawful and reasonable.CA 203/07 [2007] NZCA 423 27 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted
29 November 2007
_________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs $15,000 to the 2nd respondent
17 June 2008
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
Regal Castings Limited v G M and G N Lightbody and others
Case number
SC 72/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – whether transfer of property from first respondents to second respondent trustees should have been set aside under section 60 Property Law Act 1952 – whether the transfer amounted to fraud - whether Freeman v Pope (1870) 5 LR Ch App 538 represents the correct law where an insolvent debtor transfers property – whether there is a conclusive presumption of fraud in such situations– whether the High Court should have inferred an intention to defraud even if Freeman v Pope does not represent the law – whether the Court of Appeal erred by requiring the appellant to show that prejudice to the creditor was the purpose of the transaction – whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by overlooking relevant objective factors – whether the Court of Appeal erred by putting weight on subjective factors.[2007] NZCA 396 CA 234/05 7 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
13 December 2007
_______________________________
Appeal allowed. Cost to the appellant.
23 October 2008
13 December 2007
_______________________________
Appeal allowed. Cost to the appellant.
23 October 2008
Transcripts
- Hearing date 10 April 2008 SC 72/2007 (PDF, 355 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2008] NZSC 87 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
James Arthur Rose v Karen Diane Rose
Case number
SC 73/2007
Summary
Civil – Property (Relationships) Act 1976 – whether a partnership interest is an asset for the purposes of the Act – whether improvements to land that is relationship property form part of that land by operation of Land Transfer Act 1952 definition of “land” – whether increases in value to property caused by inflation are within the scope of claims under s 9A(1) or 9A(2) – whether s 9A(2) claim required evidence of an action by the respondent that had the effect of increasing the value of the property – whether s 2G requires assets and liabilities to be valued at the same date. [2007] NZCA 406 CA 212/06 11 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
6 December 2007
___________________________
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
19 May 2009
6 December 2007
___________________________
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
19 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave granted
ROSE V ROSE SC 73/2007 [6 December 2007] (PDF, 14 KB)
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
Bronwyn Estate Limited, Barry’s Car Sales, Patrick Antony Darby v Gareth Russel Hoole and Kevin David Pitfield as receivers of Hillcrest Services Limited (in receivership) and Hillcrest Services Limited
Case number
SC 81/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – costs awarded against applicants for Anton Pillar application – applicants appealed against cost award – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to refuse to dispense with security for costs – whether this decision denies the applicants access to justice by preventing them from continuing with their appeal. CA 133/07 1 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed . Costs $1,500 to the respondents. 8 February 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Lionel Andrew West v The Official Assignee
Case number
SC 82/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – disposal of applicant’s beneficial interest in property on insolvency – whether the Official Assignee was prevented from selling the applicant’s interest in the trust property when the applicant had been discharged from bankruptcy – whether the Official Assignee was free to choose which property comprised the applicant’s 1/3 share in the trust property –whether the Court of Appeal applied Cameron v Official Assignee (1987) 9 NZTC 6,187 correctly – whether the Official Assignee’s mistaken belief that he replaced the applicant as trustee of the property formed a cause of action in negligence - whether all debts owed by the applicant had been paid and whether this fact affected the ability of the Official Assignee to sell the property interest – whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicant to introduce new evidence – whether the Magna Carta prevented the Official Assignee from disposing of the applicant’s property interest. [2007] NZCA 523 CA 53/06 20 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs of $1500 to the respondent. 11 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter Miles Davies v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 83/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against Court of Appeal’s decision to confirm award of reparation to a victim for loss of earnings to the extent (20%) it is not compensable under the Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2001 (IPRC Act) – whether sentences of reparation can be characterised as proceedings for damages brought by the victim independently of the IPRC Act (prohibited by s 317(1) of that Act) – whether s 32(5) Sentencing Act 2002 prohibits the ‘topping-up’ of IPRC Act entitlements by sentences of reparation.[2007] NZCA 484 CA 101/07 2 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
15 February 2008
__________________________
Appeal allowed. Sentence of reparation is set aside and in substitution a sentence of reparation of $8,945 is imposed. Question of costs reserved.
25 May 2009
15 February 2008
__________________________
Appeal allowed. Sentence of reparation is set aside and in substitution a sentence of reparation of $8,945 is imposed. Question of costs reserved.
25 May 2009
Media Releases
- sc 83 2007 davies v new zealand police press release (PDF, 87 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
DAVIES v NEW ZEALAND POLICE SC 83/2007 [25 May 2009] (PDF, 107 KB)
Substantive judgment /Media release
Transcript
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Minister of Fisheries and The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Fisheries v Antons Trawling Limited, Esperance Fishing Co Limited and Orneagan Developments Limited
Case number
SC 84/2007
Summary
Summary Civil – appeal from a Court of Appeal decision which granted interim relief to the Respondents against a decision, of the Minister of Fisheries, to reduce the Total Allowable Catch/Total Allowable Commercial Catch for an Orange Roughy fish stock – Applicant claims that the Court of Appeal erred in law, by failing to follow the test in Carlton & United Breweries v Minister of Customs [1986] 1 NZLR 423 when determining the scope of the remedy under s 8 Judicature Amendment Act 1972 and the approach to be adopted – Applicant also claims that the Court of Appeal erred by granting interim relief in the absence of evidence, and by determining that any level of likely monetary loss was sufficient to meet the test of necessity. Application made for urgent hearing, given the practical consequences of the decision for the Orange Roughy population and the potentially wide-ranging effects of the decision on appeal. [2007] NZCA 512 CA 101/07 19 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondents jointly. 6 December 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Geoffrey Charles Dury and others v Palmerston North City Council and others
Case number
SC 91/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – Resource Management Act 1991 – application by third respondent (an orthodontist) for consent to use a dwelling in a residential area for a non-residential purpose – proposal failed to comply with conditions of District Plan and required a restricted discretionary resource consent, which Council granted without requiring notification – High Court quashed Council’s consent – Court of Appeal overturned High Court decision and restored resource consent – in the meantime, third respondent had applied for and been granted a second resource consent, subject to more restrictive conditions than the first – whether second consent replaced first consent in toto in accordance with Sutton v Moule (1992) 2 NZRMA 41 – whether third respondent may be deemed to have abandoned first consent by making and proceeding with second application and complying with its conditions – alternatively, whether the two consents coexist and third respondent must comply with the conditions of both – whether the consent that is later in time should prevail – whether the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that it had no discretion as to the available remedy – whether the Court of Appeal correctly applied the principles of the Discount Brands case ([2005] 2 NZLR 597) in relation to dispensing with public notification – application for stay of execution of Court of Appeal’s costs orders.[2007] NZCA 521 CA 198/06 CA 211/06 20 November 2007
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $1,000 to the first respondent and $1,000 jointly to the second and third respondents.
1 April 2008
1 April 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 101 of 108