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.

3 July 2026

Case information summary (as at 3 July 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 88 KB)
Case information summary (as at 3 July 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 127 KB) 

All years

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
Vincent Ross Siemer v  Michael Peter Stiassney and Korda Mentha
Case number
SC 69/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – natural justice – orders were made in the High Court against the applicant, the publisher of several websites, in respect of a defamation claim – whether the High Court judge was correct to allow an amended statement of claim to be filed and proceed to an ex parte hearing on 8 October 2008 – whether the High Court judge erred in awarding the respondent $940,000 in damages plus costs and issuing a permanent injunction against the applicant prohibiting several defamatory publications – whether the High Court judge misrepresented evidence in finding against the applicant.Civ 2005 404 001808  23 December 2009
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed
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)
Case name
Phillip Michael McMaster v The Queen
Case number
SC 91/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against convictions for aggravated robbery and unlawfully taking a motor vehicle – whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that the evidence of two co-accused was insufficiently cogent to give rise to a miscarriage of justice when the Crown case identifying the applicant as a participant in the offending was reliant on a third co-accused who was motivated to give false evidence to minimise his role in the offending.[2009] NZCA 393  CA 608/2008   9 September   2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 10 February 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MCMASTER V R SC 91/2009 11 February 2010 (PDF, 9 KB)
Transcript

 
Judgment appealed from

 
Case name
The Queen v George Evans Gwaze
Case number
SC 93/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against case stated decision – Whether Court of Appeal majority erred in concluding that the trial Judge’s decision to allow inadmissible hearsay “evidence” was an error of fact rather than an error of law and that therefore the case stated provisions of the Crimes Act 1961 were not engaged – Whether the Court of Appeal President erred in concluding that the Crown could succeed on an appeal under ss 380 and 380 of the Crimes Act 1961 in this case only if “To set aside the acquittal and direct a new trial would not be an unacceptable derogation from the spirit of the rule against double jeopardy”.[2009] NZCA 430  CA 90/2009   24 September   2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
23 November 2009
______________________
A The appeal is allowed and the acquittals are quashed. B A new trial is directed under s  382(2)(b) of the Crimes Act 1961. C  A certified direction for new trial will issue to the Registrar of the High Court at Christchurch with the consequences provided for by ss 380(4) and 382(4) of the Crimes Act.
17 May 2010
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
R v GWAZE SC 93/2009 [23 November 2009] (PDF, 7 KB)
Substantive judgment
R v GWAZE SC 93/2009 [17 May 2010] (PDF, 167 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : 25 February 2010

Elias CJ, Blanchard, McGrath, Wilson J.
Judgment appealed from

 
Case name
Alex Kwong Wong v The Queen
Case number
SC 96/2009
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction and sentence – convictions for importing methamphetamine and possessing for supply – during jury deliberations at the applicant’s retrial (following successful appeal in R v Wong [2008] 3 NZLR 1) the jury sent a note to the judge stating that they had finished deliberating, the judge sought clarification and the jury sent a second note stating that they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict on any of the charges, noting that “further effort would result in bullying” – the judge gave a standard Papadopoulos direction – whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the applicant’s convictions as safe – whether there has been a substantial miscarriage of justice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the applicant’ s minimum period of imprisonment was set correctly – whether the High Court judge wrongly allowed the Police to destroy certain evidence after the first trial – the applicant also seeks an interlocutory order to adduce both rebuttal evidence and new evidence in the form of a market research survey.[2009] NZCA 440   CA  190/2009, CA 356/2009  28 September   2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismised. 2 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WONG V R SC 96/2009 2 March 2010
Recall judgment
ALEX KWONG WONG v R [2014] NZSC 171 [25 November 2014] (PDF, 52 KB)
Judgment appealed from

 
Case name
Wei Feng Pan v The Queen
Case number
SC 100/2009
Summary
Criminal – Offences relating to Class A drug – Appeal against conviction and sentence - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its findings about the applicant’s involvement in the importation of drugs – Whether the admission of cell-site evidence was inadmissible as being more prejudicial than probative – Whether the Court of Appeal were correct to find that the trial could proceed with 10 jurors – Whether the Court of Appeal were correct to hold that the trial Judge had not misdirected the jury on the onus of proof, or on the motive of co-accused to lie – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant had a central role in the overall crime for the purposes of sentencing – Whether the Court of Appeal failed to take into account mitigating factors – Whether the Court of Appeal had regard to principles of sentencing in the Sentencing Act 2002.[2009] NZCA 445   CA  770/2008  30 September  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 9 February 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WEI FENG PAN v R SC 100/2009 [9 February 2010]  (PDF, 10 KB)
Judgment appealed from

The Queen v Chin [2009] NZCA 445 (30 September 2009) 
Case name
Ghlenn Thomas Douglas Gollop  v The Queen
Case number
SC 104/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – appeal against sentence – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding without evidence to the required standard that the quantum of manufacture was 250g which materially effected the level of sentence in terms of s 24 of the Sentencing Act 2002 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the minimum term of imprisonment was justified when the appellant was not represented by counsel at sentencing, contrary to s 30 of the Sentencing Act 2002.[2009] NZCA 486    CA  162/200  19 October  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
17 December 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
GOLLOP v R SC 104/2009 [17 December 2009]  (PDF, 38 KB)
Judgment appealed from

The Queen v Rhodes and others [2009] NZCA 486 (19 October 2009) 
Case name
Edward Woodrow Collins v The Queen
Case number
SC 110/2009
Summary
Criminal – Conspiracy to manufacture Class A drug – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the trial Judge gave proper jury directions on the evidence of co-conspirators – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not ruling whether there was reasonable evidence that the applicant adhered to the conspiracy.[2009] NZCA 519    CA  119/2009    4 November  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
2 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
COLLINS v R SC 110/2009 [2 March 2010]  (PDF, 13 KB)
Judgment appealed from

The Queen v Collins [2009] NZCA 519 (4 November 2009) 
Case name
Stephen Leslie Jellyman v The Queen
Case number
SC 112/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – whether the sentence of preventive detention was manifestly excessive; Whether the appellant’s right to silence and right against self-incrimination were breached by admitting the appellant’ s videotaped statement to police; Whether the complainant, who was intellectually disadvantaged, understood either the oath or the moral or legal consequences of not telling the truth and thereby occasioning a miscarriage of justice; Whether the complainant’s unsworn evidence was admissible.[2009] NZCA 532    CA  6/2009   12  November  2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
12 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JELLYMAN v R SC 112/2009 [12 March 2010]  (PDF, 14 KB)
Page 34 of 46