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
Christopher Cliff Morris v The Queen
Case number
SC 61/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – Crimes Act 1961, s 229A – using a tax document with intent to defraud – whether, under the Tax Administration Act 1994, employees of the Inland Revenue Department can give evidence in the prosecution – whether ss 81(1) and 81(3) of that Act preclude employees of the Inland Revenue Department giving evidence unless either the prosecution is initiated by the Commissioner of Inland Revenue for offences under the Inland Revenue Acts or the evidence falls within one of the exceptions listed in s 81(4) – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to direct a new trial under s 382 of the Crimes Act 1961 – application for leave to appeal out of time.CA 120/04 4 November 2004
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 30 October 2007
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Saxmere Company Limited, The Escorial Company Limited, Richard King, Russell Stewart Emmerson and Forest Ramge Limited v Wool Board Disestablishment Company Limited
Case number
SC 64/2007
Summary
Civil – applicants challenged the Wool Board’s decisions allocating funding for wool marketing, seeking judicial review and restitution of levies paid and alleging breach of statutory duty (s 6(6) Wool Act 1997) and negligence – High Court Judge found the Board liable in damages for breach of statutory duty and negligence, in relation to one of their four decisions – Court of Appeal allowed an appeal by the respondent and dismissed a cross-appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its analysis of the Board’ s decisions under s 6(6) of the Act – whether the Court of Appeal took proper account of the context and purpose of the Wool Act – whether the Court of Appeal failed to address the existence of a duty of care independent of s 6(6) – whether the Court of Appeal erred by making material factual findings which differed from the trial Judge and which were contrary to the evidence heard by the trial Judge – whether the High Court Judge erred in limiting his damages to only one of the four decisions, and in denying restitution of levies.CA 222/05 [2007] NZCA 349 15 August 2007 CIV 485 – 2003 – 2724 6 December 2005
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed with costs of $2,500 to the respondent.
12 November 2007
_________________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs to respondent $15,000 together with reasonable disbursements.
3 July 2009
__________________________
The judgment of this Court delivered on 3 July 2009 ([2009] NZSC 72) is recalled and the orders made in that judgment are set aside. The appeal is allowed and the proceeding remitted for rehearing in the Court of Appeal. Costs are reserved.  Counsel should make written submissions directed to how costs should be borne for the previous hearing in the Court of Appeal and the two hearings in this Court.
27 November 2009
Case name
Jule Patrick Burns v The Queen
Case number
SC 65/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction for murder – whether verdict should be set aside on the ground that it is unreasonable or cannot be supported having regard to the evidence – whether DNA evidence was properly admitted at trial.CA 152/2006 [2007] NZCA 308 23 July 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
James Arthur Rose v Karen Diane Rose
Case number
SC 73/2007
Summary
Civil – Property (Relationships) Act 1976 – whether a partnership interest is an asset for the purposes of the Act – whether improvements to land that is relationship property form part of that land by operation of Land Transfer Act 1952 definition of “land” – whether increases in value to property caused by inflation are within the scope of claims under s 9A(1) or 9A(2) – whether s 9A(2) claim required evidence of an action by the respondent that had the effect of increasing the value of the property – whether s 2G requires assets and liabilities to be valued at the same date. [2007] NZCA 406 CA 212/06 11 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
6 December 2007
___________________________
Appeal and cross appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
19 May 2009
Leave judgment - leave granted

Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
W v The Queen
Case number
SC 74/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against convictions for historical sexual offending – whether the admission of evidence in rebuttal to a recent complaint allegation, which evidence the Court of Appeal held to be inadmissible, created a miscarriage of justice. [2007] NZCA 408 CA 164/07 11 September 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed .

5 December 2007

Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Carey Dean Turner v The Queen
Case number
SC 77/2007
Summary
Criminal Appeal – sexual violation – whether evidence given by the complainant was incorrectly admitted – whether the evidence was recent complaint evidence – whether the trial Judge should have given a direction to the jury about recent complaint evidence – whether the trial judge erred by giving incorrect directions to the jury about the status of a video statement made out of Court by the accused - whether this direction by the trial judge undermined the tripartite direction given about the way the jury ought to consider evidence given by the accused at trial – whether the Court of Appeal erred by dismissing the appellants appeal to that Court.[2007] NZCA 437 CA 181/07 1 October 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Terrence Austin McFarland v The Queen
Case number
SC 79/2007
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction for maiming with intent to cause grievous bodily harm – applicant was unrepresented at trial – amicus curiae appointed without prior notice to the applicant, in his absence, and without his consent – whether the amicus made a substantial error in failing to advise the applicant against calling evidence from the former co-accused – whether the trial Judge erred by misdirecting the jury on the standard of proof and failing to provide directions on the cross-examination and the submissions made to the jury by crown counsel.[2007] NZCA 449 CA 385/06 18 October 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 March 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Lionel Andrew West v The Official Assignee
Case number
SC 82/2007
Summary
Civil appeal – disposal of applicant’s beneficial interest in property on insolvency – whether the Official Assignee was prevented from selling the applicant’s interest in the trust property when the applicant had been discharged from bankruptcy – whether the Official Assignee was free to choose which property comprised the applicant’s 1/3 share in the trust property –whether the Court of Appeal applied Cameron v Official Assignee (1987) 9 NZTC 6,187 correctly – whether the Official Assignee’s mistaken belief that he replaced the applicant as trustee of the property formed a cause of action in negligence - whether all debts owed by the applicant had been paid and whether this fact affected the ability of the Official Assignee to sell the property interest – whether the Court of Appeal should have allowed the applicant to introduce new evidence – whether the Magna Carta prevented the Official Assignee from disposing of the applicant’s property interest. [2007] NZCA 523 CA 53/06 20 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs of $1500 to the respondent. 11 March 2008
Case name
Minister of Fisheries and The Chief Executive of the Ministry of Fisheries v Antons Trawling Limited, Esperance Fishing Co Limited and Orneagan Developments Limited
Case number
SC 84/2007
Summary
Summary Civil – appeal from a Court of Appeal decision which granted interim relief to the Respondents against a decision, of the Minister of Fisheries, to reduce the Total Allowable Catch/Total Allowable Commercial Catch for an Orange Roughy fish stock – Applicant claims that the Court of Appeal erred in law, by failing to follow the test in Carlton & United Breweries v Minister of Customs [1986] 1 NZLR 423 when determining the scope of the remedy under s 8 Judicature Amendment Act 1972 and the approach to be adopted – Applicant also claims that the Court of Appeal erred by granting interim relief in the absence of evidence, and by determining that any level of likely monetary loss was sufficient to meet the test of necessity. Application made for urgent hearing, given the practical consequences of the decision for the Orange Roughy population and the potentially wide-ranging effects of the decision on appeal. [2007] NZCA 512 CA 101/07 19 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondents jointly. 6 December 2007
Case name
Stephen Peter Tandy v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2007
Summary
Criminal appeal – sentencing – Court of Appeal quashed the sentence of six and a half years imposed by the District Court judge and replaced it with a sentence of eight years – whether the Court of Appeal was correct to increase the sentence imposed in the District Court – in particular, whether courts are obliged to accept eight years as the starting point in cases of sexual violation by rape – whether a guilty plea made after the complainant has given evidence is necessarily less worthy than a guilty plea that spares the complainant the need to give evidence – whether a guilty plea entered part way through trial by one accused is of assistance to the Crown with respect to bolstering the credibility of the complainant’ s evidence – whether the trial judge has an unfettered right to enter a merciful sentence – whether the Court of Appeal made material factual errors – whether the Court of Appeal’s approach has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.[2007] NZCA 550 CA 511/07 29 November 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 22 February 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed