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.

20 March 2026

Case information summary 2025 (as at 20 March 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 88 KB)
Case information summary 2025 (as at 20 March 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 123 KB) 

All years

Case name
Paul Joseph Cameron  v The Queen
Case number
SC 54/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – murder – whether statements made by the appellant were made in circumstances adversely affecting their reliability and ought to have been excluded – whether statements made by the appellant were influenced by oppression and ought to have been excluded – whether statements made by the appellant were improperly obtained and ought to have been excluded - whether the appellant’s conviction was a substantial miscarriage of justice[2009] NZCA 87  CA  568/2008   24 March 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 12 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
CAMERON V R SC 54/2009 12 August 2009
Case name
Luana Roberta Taylor v The Queen
Case number
SC 56/2009
Summary
Criminal – Admissibility of a statement – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing an application for leave to appeal a pre-trial ruling[2009] NZCA 228  CA  210/2009    2 June 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused. 1 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
TAYLOR V R SC 56/2009 1 July 2009
Case name
Lipene Sila v The Queen
Case number
SC 58/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against murder convictions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the Trial Judge was correct to not allow self-defence to be put to the jury.[2009] NZCA 233  CA  404/2008    5 June  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 10 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SILA V R SC 58/2009 10 August 2009
Case name
Victor Stojanovich v The Queen
Case number
SC 62/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – convictions for sexual violations by rape and unlawful sexual connection – appeal based on conduct of defence counsel and alleged deficiencies in the trial process – whether the appellant was denied the right to a fair trial – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the failure of trial counsel to cross-examine the complainant on inconsistencies between her evidence at trial, her statement to the Police and evidence at first trial did not amount to a miscarriage of justice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial judge’s direction on consent did not amount to a miscarriage of justice.[2009] NZCA 210 CA  427/2008    27 May  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
27 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
STOJANOVICH V R SC 62/2009 27 August 2009 (PDF, 12 KB)
Case name
Kobina Bertum Dadzie v The Queen
Case number
SC 63/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction and sentence – Whether appellant denied any due process right in raising counsel incompetence claims – Whether substantial miscarriage of justice established.[2009] NZCA 261  CA 121/2009    23 June 2009.
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 26 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
DADZIE V R SC 63/2009 26 August 2009
Case name
Maia Rongonui v The Queen
Case number
SC 66/2009
Summary
Criminal – Evidence Act 2006 – Mr Rongonui was convicted of one count of sexual violation by unlawful connection and one of assault with intent to commit rape – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the complainant’s evidence that she had told her friend what occurred after the incident did not fall within s 35 of the Evidence Act dealing with previous consistent statements because evidence was not given of anything actually said by the complainant – whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the District Court Judge was correct to allow the prosecutor to use a witness statement to refresh the memory of a witness and to allow cross-examination of the witness on the grounds of hostility[2009] NZCA 279 CA 736/2008  2 July 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
21 September 2009
___________________________
Appeal allowed, convictions set aside. Order for new trial. Reasons to be given at a later date. 2
7 November 2009
_____________________________
Reasons given 23 July 2010
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Rongonui v R SC 66/2009 [21 September 2009] (PDF, 9 KB)
Substantive judgment
RONGONUI v R SC 66/2009 [27 November 2009] (PDF, 170 KB)
Case name
K v The Queen
Case number
SC 68/2009
Summary
Criminal – Sexual Offending – Rape – Evidence – Admissibility – recent complaint and hearsay evidence – Appeal against conviction – Whether substantial miscarriage of justice established – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding (1) that the trial Judge’ s directions on admissible evidence were adequate; (2) that there was sufficient evidence of penetration; (3) That the evidence of the complainant’s sister was not inadmissible recent complaint evidence; (4) That expert evidence relating to a summary of facts was inconsequential; (5) That it was unnecessary for the trial Judge to give a reliability direction in light of the evidence of intoxication; (6) that the trial Judge correctly ruled on the inadmissibility of two recorded telephone calls.[2009] NZCA 307    CA 664 /2008    16     July 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 20 October 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
K (CA 644/2008) V R SC 68/2009 20 October 2009 (PDF, 43 KB)
Case name
Ralph Lindsay Brunie v The Queen
Case number
SC 70/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against sentence – convictions for sexual offending – whether the sentence of six years imprisonment (reduced from seven years by the Court of Appeal) was manifestly excessive[2009] NZCA 300 CA 199/2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
7 October 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BRUNIE V R SC 70/2009 7 October 2009 (PDF, 12 KB)
Case name
Kevin Stanton Burdett v The Queen
Case number
SC 73/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against sentence – Sexual offending against girl aged between 12 and 16 years – Whether Court of Appeal erred in fixing starting point of 3.5 years’ imprisonment for a first offender charged with a single act of sexual connection when no tariff decision established for relevant type of sexual offending – Whether Court of Appeal failed to take into account availability of home detention as a sentencing option?[2009]  NZCA  366   CA 115/2009  19 August  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 4 November 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BURDETT V R SC 73/2009 4 November 2009 (PDF, 34 KB)
Case name
Philip Wayne Hart v The Queen
Case number
SC 74/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against conviction – convictions for sexual offending – the trial judge acceded to an application by the Crown for a prior consistent statement of the complainant to be admitted in terms of s 35(2) of the Evidence Act 2006 to rebut the assertion that the complainant’s evidence was fabricated in order to entitle her to ACC – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that defence counsel asserted recent invention on the part of the complainant and thus attacked the complainant’s veracity, opening the way to evidence on that topic under s 37 and also justifying an application by the Crown for an order that the complainant’s prior consistent statement was admissible under s 35(2) – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the trial judge did not need to direct the jury on its use of the prior consistent statement because such statements, once admitted, are admissible for the truth of their contents under the Evidence Act 2006.[2009]  NZCA  276   CA 609/2008    29 June  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
15 October 2009
_______________________________
Appeal dismissed.
23 July 2010
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
HART v R SC 74/2009 [15 October 2009] (PDF, 6 KB)
Substantive judgment
HART v R SC 74/2009 [23 July 2010] (PDF, 210 KB)
Page 90 of 111