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.
19 June 2026
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 89 KB)
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 126 KB)
All years
Case name
Razdan Rafiq v The Director of the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand
Case number
SC 122/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to dispense with security for costs.[2014] NZCA 519
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
28 November 2014
28 November 2014
Case name
Jianyoung Guo, Jiaxi Guo, Jiaming Guo v Minister of Immigration
Case number
SC 124/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Immigration – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 26(2) – Human Rights Act 1993, s 21(1)(l)(iv) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not finding that the deportation order against Mr Guo was unjust on the basis that it involved double jeopardy, in breach of s 26(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not finding that the deportation orders against the remaining applicants were unjust on the basis that they involved discriminating on a ground expressly prohibited by s 21(1)(l)(iv) of the Human Rights Act, being a relative of a particular person – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to give leave to appeal in relation to the grounds advanced in the application for leave to appeal to the High Court.[2014] NZCA 513 CA263/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal by Jianyong Guo is dismissed.
B The applications for leave to appeal by Jiaxi Guo and Jiaming Guo are granted (Guo v Minister of Immigration [2014] NZCA 513).
C The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was right to decline the applications of Jiaxi Guo and Jiaming Guo for leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal dismissing their appeals against deportation.
3 June 2015
____________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The appellants are granted leave to appeal to the High Court against the dismissal by the Immigration and Protection Tribunal of their appeals on the question whether the Tribunal erred in law in concluding that it would not be unjust or unduly harsh to deport them from New Zealand.
C All issues as to costs, including the order for costs made in the High Court, are reserved. Any application in respect of costs is to be made within 10 working days.
2 September 2015
B The applications for leave to appeal by Jiaxi Guo and Jiaming Guo are granted (Guo v Minister of Immigration [2014] NZCA 513).
C The approved ground of appeal is whether the Court of Appeal was right to decline the applications of Jiaxi Guo and Jiaming Guo for leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal dismissing their appeals against deportation.
3 June 2015
____________
A The appeal is allowed.
B The appellants are granted leave to appeal to the High Court against the dismissal by the Immigration and Protection Tribunal of their appeals on the question whether the Tribunal erred in law in concluding that it would not be unjust or unduly harsh to deport them from New Zealand.
C All issues as to costs, including the order for costs made in the High Court, are reserved. Any application in respect of costs is to be made within 10 working days.
2 September 2015
Transcripts
- Hearing date 1 April 2015 (PDF, 93 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2015] NZSC 132 (PDF, 247 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Additional document
Transcript Hearing date 9 July 2015 (PDF, 577 KB)
Substantive judgment
Case name
NR v M and others
Case number
SC 125/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether there were a number of material errors in the Court of Appeal’s hearing and judgment[2014] NZCA 526 CA 144/2014
Result
The application to file further submissions is declined. The interlocutory application of 1 December 2014 is dismissed.
Costs of $2,500 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M.
19 December 2014
______________
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014).
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Costs of $2,500 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M.
19 December 2014
______________
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014).
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
N v M [2014] NZSC 189 [19 December 2014] (PDF, 95 KB)
Substantive judgment
N v M [2015] NZSC 15 [27 February 20 (PDF, 164 KB)
Case name
Terranova Homes & Care Limited v Service and Food Workers Union Nga Ringa Tota Incorporated and Kristine Bartlett
Case number
SC 127/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Equal Pay Act 1972 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 3(1)(b) of the Equal Pay Act 1972. [2014] NZCA 516 CA 631/2013
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
22 December 2014
22 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Ian Russell Geary v Accident Compensation Corporation
Case number
SC 128/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal fulfilled the role of an appeal court – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the High Court Rules endorse the practice of a Judge hearing an application for leave to appeal against his or her own decision.[2014] NZCA 534 CA 472/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
23 February 2015
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
23 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Clare O’Brien and Attorney-General
Case number
SC 130/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the High Court erred in granting the Attorney -General standing to be heard where the proceedings had previously been stayed against the Attorney-General. [2014] NZHC 2886 CIV 2013 485 5611
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
25 February 2015
___________
Application for recall dismissed.
10 March 2015
___________
Second application for recall dismissed.
5 June 2015
_____________
Judgment reissued.
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the second respondent costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
5 June 2015
______________
Third application for recall dismissed.
23 June 2015
B The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
25 February 2015
___________
Application for recall dismissed.
10 March 2015
___________
Second application for recall dismissed.
5 June 2015
_____________
Judgment reissued.
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the second respondent costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
5 June 2015
______________
Third application for recall dismissed.
23 June 2015
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Recall judgment
Case name
Dennis Joseph Gardiner and Hutia Monica Gardiner v Westpac New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 133/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the mortgagee sale was substantially below the statutory and common law criteria of best price – Whether the sale was arguably unlawful being made to Westpac’s real estate agent’ s licensed salesperson responsible for selling the property – Whether the proceeds of the two mortgagee sales arguably fully repaid the loan but guarantee quantum issues were not summarily determined nor capable of being properly determined on appeal. [2014] NZCA 537 CA 264/2013
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
9 March 2015
B The applicants must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
9 March 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Evgeny Orlov v New Zealand Law Society and others
Case number
SC 135/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005, r 35(6) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the application for review of the decision of the Registrar of the Court of Appeal not to dispense with or vary payment of security for costs.[2014] NZCA 569 CA 456/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500 plus reasonable disbursements.
18 February 2015
The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500 plus reasonable disbursements.
18 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Allen Louis Harriman v Attorney-General and New Zealand Parole Board
Case number
SC 137/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether there are a number of material errors in the Court of Appeal’s judgment.[2014] NZCA 544 CA 463/2013
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
No order for costs.
14 April 2015
No order for costs.
14 April 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
New Zealand Cards Limited v Colin Ramsay
Case number
SC 138/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal considered all of the issues on which leave was granted – Whether there was unfairness or lawyer misconduct in the process leading to the Court of Appeal judgment – The proper approach to constructive dismissal – Whether on the facts of this case there has been a dismissal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred.[2014] NZCA 512 CA 424/2012
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500. 22 April 2015
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500. 22 April 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Page 80 of 107