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 July 2026
Case information summary (as at 17 July 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 17 July 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 128 KB)
All years
Case name
Drive NZ Classic Limited v Low Volume Vehicle Technical Association Incorporated And New Zealand Transport Agency
Case number
SC 101/2022
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring a civil appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay each respondent costs of $2,500.
15 December 2022
B The applicant must pay each respondent costs of $2,500.
15 December 2022
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
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
Lance Phillip Newing v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 51/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Driving with excess blood alcohol – Whether the District Court erred in refusing to discharge the applicant without conviction.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 22 August 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Melanie Wichart v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 61/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in declining leave to bring a second appeal (in relation to admissible evidence for proving a charge of driving with excess blood alcohol and in relation to the onus of proof in relation to the expiry date of a specimen kit).
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
27 September 2019
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
27 September 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Jiri Kupec v The Queen
Case number
SC 92/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the trial Judge correctly applied the formulation of recklessness adopted in Cameron v R [2017] NZSC 89 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge was correct to dismiss a defence submission that, if the applicant proved an innocent state of mind, an acquittal should follow – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the trial Judge’ s direction on the applicant’s out of court statement was adequate.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
22 November 2018
22 November 2018
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JIRI KUPEC v R [2018] NZSC 113 [22 November 2018] (PDF, 41 KB)
Case name
Angela Claire Shaw and Ian Alexander Shaw v Colin David Owens and David Stuart Vance as liquidators of Aluminium Plus Wellington Limited
Case number
SC 90/2017
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the directors’ conduct amounted to breach of the duties imposed by ss 135 (reckless trading) and 137 (duty of care).
Result
A The application for an extension of time to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
C Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondents.
20 October 2017
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
C Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the respondents.
20 October 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Arthur Sylvan Morgenstern and Tanya May Lavas v Stephanie Beth Jeffreys and Timothy Wilson Downes
Case number
SC 109/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Companies Act 1993, ss 131, 135, 137, 138 and 301 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that, in a claim for breach of ss 131 (duty to act in good faith and in the best interests of the company), 135 (duty not to agree to, cause or allow reckless trading) and 137 (duty of care), in relation to selling an asset (shares) to the company at an alleged undervalue, the onus is on the director to prove that the asset was transferred for fair value – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a director facing claims under ss 131, 135 and 137, who relied on professional advice, is required by s 138 to plead this as an affirmative defence and bears the onus of proof – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that, in a claim under s 301, the onus is on the director to prove that the breach caused no loss to the company – Whether the Court of Appeal erred, in fixing the amount to be paid or contributed under s 301, by proceeding on a restitutionary basis and failing to take into account the actual loss caused to creditors – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that an inference could be drawn against the first appellant, by reason of failure to call evidence from the company’s accountants, when the respondents, as liquidators, were in an equal or better position to call that evidence.[2014] NZCA 449 CA 122/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
The applicants are to pay the respondents costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar. 2 December 2014
The applicants are to pay the respondents costs of $2,500 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed by the Registrar. 2 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Daniel Brian Thomas Barrie v The Queen
Case number
SC 88/2012
Summary
Criminal Appeal – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, s 23(1)(b) – Right to consult and instruct a lawyer without delay and to be informed of that right – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in excluding foreign lawyers from those who may be consulted by a detainee under s 23(1)(b) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 in the drink/drive context – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that a failure by Police to explain that there is no right to consult a foreign lawyer will not constitute a failure to facilitate the right to counsel provided the opportunity to consult and instruct a New Zealand lawyer had been afforded.[2012] NZCA 485 CA 849/2011
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BARRIE v THE POLICE SC 88/2012 [15 March 2013] (PDF, 50 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
15 March 2013.
15 March 2013.
Case name
John Colman v The Police
Case number
SC 106/2010
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Summary Offences Act 1981, s (4)(1)(a) – using insulting language within hearing of a public place, being reckless as to whether anyone was insulted by the words - discharged without conviction on appeal – leave refused to appeal to the Court of Appeal – whether the applicant’s rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 have been breached.CRI 2009 488 09 22 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
COLMAN v THE POLICE SC 106/2010 [8 December 2010] (PDF, 66 KB)
Dates
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
8 December 2010.
Case name
Ports of Auckland Limited v Southpac Trucks Limited
Case number
SC 18/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Carriage of Goods Act 1979 – Statutory Interpretation – Proper meaning of s 6 “not liable as such” – Whether Court of Appeal erred in its application of the statutory exemption conferred in s 6 of the Carriage of Goods Act – Whether Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that fork lift operator negligently driving into truck and causing $60,000 damage was exempt from liability under s 16(2) of the Carriage of Goods Act with the consequence that Ports of Auckland Ltd could not be held vicariously liable.[2008] NZCA 573 CA 355/2007 22 December 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
3 April 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed and the judgment of the High Court is restored. Appellant awarded costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements. Costs order in the Court of Appeal is reversed.
30 October 2009
3 April 2009
__________________________
Appeal allowed and the judgment of the High Court is restored. Appellant awarded costs of $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements. Costs order in the Court of Appeal is reversed.
30 October 2009
Transcripts
- Hearing date 6 October 2009 (PDF, 150 KB)
Media Releases
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Page 1 of 3