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.
28 November 2025
Case information summary 2025 (as at 28 November 2025) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary 2025 (as at 28 November 2025) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 120 KB)
All years
Case name
B v The Queen
Case number
SC 6/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence – Evidence Act 2006, s 25 – Admissibility of expert opinion evidence – Appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal, which held that the trial Judge’s refusal to allow the defence to call an expert did not cause a miscarriage of justice – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the applicant was not prejudiced by this refusal[2011] NZCA 654 CA 196/2010
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
3 April 2012.
3 April 2012.
Case name
Raghu Aryasomayajula v The Queen
Case number
SC 9/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Crimes Act 1961 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law – Whether there was a miscarriage of justice – Whether there was insufficient evidence to convict.[2011] NZCA 633 CA 105/2011
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
27 March 2012.The application for leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment of the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
16 December 2015
27 March 2012.The application for leave to withdraw the notice of abandonment of the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
16 December 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Allan John Todd v The Queen
Case number
SC 10/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Conviction and sentence – Threatening to kill and sexual violation - Whether Court of Appeal correct to dismiss appeal against conviction and sentence – Fair Trial – Police misconduct pre-trial – Right to Counsel – Counsel misconduct at trial – Fresh evidence.CA 265/2004
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
16 April 2012.
16 April 2012.
Case name
Ivan Sydney Oliver Hawkins v The Queen
Case number
SC 11/2012
Summary
Criminal Procedure – Bail Act 2000, ss14, 70 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that granting bail pending appeal to the Applicant, so as to allow him to contact witnesses, was not in the interests of justice.CA 825/2011 [2011] NZCA 656
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
15 May 2012.
15 May 2012.
Case name
Mark Joseph Benjamin v The Queen
Case number
SC 13/2012
Summary
Criminal Procedure – A number of errors alleged relating to process and matters of fact and law in Court of Appeal decision – Whether by allocating a one day hearing the Court of Appeal breached principles of procedural fairness and natural justice resulting in counsel for the applicant having an inadequate opportunity to present the applicant’s case – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusions as to the reliability of the computer system and by refusing to admit new evidence relating to the computer records – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its consideration of the audit report – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the outcome of the trial was not affected by the decision of the applicant’ s counsel not to brief and lead Mr Lowe’s evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal ought to have considered the unlikelihood of Mr Spence junior having acted as an “instrument” of the applicant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its treatment of evidence as to whether there was an oral agreement to increase the applicant’s salary – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that certain findings regarding count 5 were open to the trial judge – Whether trial counsel misconducted the trial by failing to put the appellant’s case to opposing witnesses as required by s 92 of the Evidence Act 2006. CA 897/2010 [2012] NZCA 9
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
23 May 2012.
23 May 2012.
Case name
Shannon Richard Andrews v The Queen
Case number
SC 17/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing – whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to take the personal circumstances of the Applicant into consideration – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding a greater sentence to the Applicant than to his co-conspirator – whether the Court of Appeal erred in not questioning how the estimation as to the stolen goods was reached – whether the Court of Appeal was influenced inappropriately by allegedly bias comments made by the sentencing judge.CA 455/2011 [2012] NZCA 61
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
24 May 2012.
24 May 2012.
Case name
Tyson Bennett v The Queen
Case number
SC 18/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing – Sentencing Act 2002 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in prioritising punishment over rehabilitation – Whether the Court of Appeal placed disproportionate weight on one of the purposes of sentencing in the Sentencing Act 2002SC 682/2011 [2012] NZCA 44
Dates
Notice of Abandonment being lodged, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
22 August 2012.
22 August 2012.
Case name
Michael Santo Colosimo v The Queen
Case number
SC 19/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence and Procedure – Disclosure of documents at trial or before trial – Whether the trial Judge and Court of Appeal erred in their approach to alleged prejudice caused by prosecution use of a document not disclosed before trial – Whether the trial Judge should have ordered an adjournment or made other appropriate orders once the document in question was disclosed.SC 687/2011 [2012] NZCA 60
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
30 May 2012.
30 May 2012.
Case name
Shane Daniel Hannigan v The Queen
Case number
SC 20/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence – Evidence Act 2006, ss 43 and 94 – Appeal against conviction for arson – Propensity evidence – Whether propensity evidence admitted without regard to the balancing exercise required by s 43 to determine whether the probative value of the evidence is outweighed the risk that it would be unfairly prejudicial – Whether evidence related to the specific issue in dispute – Whether any direction to the jury as to how to use the evidence should have been given – Whether evidence amounted to separate criminal allegations that should have been brought as separate charges – Cross-examination – Whether Crown breached s 94 by cross-examining its own witness – Whether Court of Appeal should have applied Rongonui v R [2010] NZSC 92, [2011] 1 NZLR 23.CA 639/2011 [2012] NZCA 133
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted.
B The approved ground is whether the way in which Kirsty Hannigan was re-examined led to a substantial miscarriage of justice.
30 May 2012
______________________
Appeal dismissed.
26 April 2013
Transcript
Hearing date : 22 October 2012
Elias CJ, McGrath, William Young, Chambers, Glazebrook JJ.
Case name
WDB v The Queen
Case number
SC 22/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Pre-trial application – Evidence Act 2006, s 43 – Admissibility of propensity evidence – Whether Court of Appeal erred in dismissing appeal against admission of propensity evidence at trial – Probative value of propensity evidence in identifying the offender –– Incident of alleged offending and propensity incident allegedly different in nature – Whether Court of Appeal was correct to regard that the inevitable identification of the applicant in respect of all charges once the applicant’s identification on one charge is established is not unfairly prejudicial.CA 696/2011 [2012] NZCA106
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
9 May 2012.
9 May 2012.
Page 70 of 109