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.

19 June 2026

Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026) –  Cases where leave granted (PDF, 89 KB)
Case information summary (as at 19 June 2026)  – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 126 KB) 

All years

Case name
New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council and Attorney-General (for and on behalf of the Minister of Health)
Case number
SC 141/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council [2016] NZCA 462, [2017] 2 NZLR 13).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeals of the appellant in CA159/2014, CA615/2014 and CA529/2015.
20 February 2017

___________________________________________________
The application for leave to admit the TDB report annexed to the affidavit of Philip Barry is dismissed.
30 October 2017

_________________________________________________
A The appeals from the decision of the Court of Appeal in relation to CA529/2015 and CA615/2014, referred to respectively as the Regulations and Medicines Act appeals, are dismissed.
B Costs are reserved. Any memoranda on costs may be filed by 31 July 2018. 27 June 2018 A The appeal is dismissed. B The appellant must pay the first respondent costs of $20,000 plus usual disbursements.
C We make no award of costs in favour of the second respondent.
27 June 2018
Date of hearing
16 November 2017 - 17 November 2017
Transcripts
Media Releases
High Court decision
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INC v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2014] NZHC 395 [7 March 2014]
Court of Appeal decision
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2016] NZCA 462 [27 September 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2017] NZSC 13 [20 February 2017] (PDF, 63 KB)
Supreme court decision
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2017] NZSC 162 [30 October 2017] (PDF, 66 KB)
Substantive judgment
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2018] NZSC 59 [27 June 2018] (PDF, 985 KB)
Supreme court decision
NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2018] NZSC 60 [27 June 2018] (PDF, 271 KB)
Supreme court decision
cost: NEW HEALTH NEW ZEALAND INCORPORATED v SOUTH TARANAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL [2018] NZSC 70 [7 August 2018] (PDF, 206 KB)
Case name
Jacqueline Ann Cameron v The Queen
Case number
SC 142/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Appeal against sentence –  Social Security Act 1964, s 127 –  Crimes Act 1961, s 228(b) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its calculation of the debt owed by the applicant –  Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion regarding the applicant’s counsel –  Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding there was no miscarriage of justice. [2016] NZCA 536   CA505/2013
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
21 August 2017
Date of Judgment
01 January 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JACQUELINE ANN CAMERON v R [2017] NZSC 125 [21 August 2017] (PDF, 143 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
CAMERON v R [2016] NZCA 536 [11 November 2016]
Case name
Leslie McGeachin v The Queen
Case number
SC 144/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the applicant’s conviction on the basis of a number of alleged trial errors – Whether the District Court erred in sentencing the applicant to 19 years’ imprisonment.  [2015] NZCA 558   CA730/2013
Result
A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against conviction is dismissed.
B The application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.
24 February 2017
______________________________________
The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of 24 February 2017 (McGeachin v R [2017] NZSC 16) is dismissed.
12 October 2020
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
LESLIE MCGEACHIN v R [2017] NZSC 16   24 February 2017 (PDF, 91 KB)
Recall judgment
LESLIE McGEACHIN v R [2017] NZSC 193 [19 December 2017] (PDF, 183 KB)
Recall judgment
LESLIE MCGEACHIN v R [2020] NZSC 95 [14 September 2020] (PDF, 62 KB)
Recall judgment
LESLIE MCGEACHIN v R [2020] NZSC 109 [12 October 2020] (PDF, 34 KB)
Judgment appealed from

MCGEACHIN v R [2015] NZCA 558    19 November 2015
Case name
David Brown and Glen Sycamore v New Zealand Basing Limited
Case number
SC 145/2016
Summary
Civil appeal – Employment Relations Act 2000 – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that by selecting a different legal jurisdiction to govern their relationship, the parties could contract out of the right in the Employment Relations Act to be free from dismissal and discrimination based on age.[2016] NZCA 525   CA12/2015
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (New Zealand Basing Ltd v Brown [2016] NZCA 525, [2017] 2 NZLR 93).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that age discrimination provisions of the Employment Relations Act 2000 do not apply to the employment agreements between the applicants and the respondent.
17 February 2017
_________________
A The appeal is allowed and the judgment of the Employment Court is restored.
B The order for costs made in the Court of Appeal is set aside.
C The respondent is to pay the appellants costs in respect of the Court of Appeal hearing, to be fixed by that Court, and in respect of this appeal costs of $25,000 and reasonable disbursements.  We certify for two counsel.
13 September 2017
Transcripts
Media Releases
Employment Court decision
DAVID BROWN v NEW ZEALAND BASING LIMITED of Hong Kong (a wholly owned subsidiary of CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LIMITED of Hong Kong) NZEmpC AUCKLAND [2014] NZEmpC 229 [15 December 2014]
Court of Appeal decision
NEW ZEALAND BASING LIMITED V BROWN [2016] NZCA 525 [4 November 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
DAVID BROWN v NEW ZEALAND BASING LIMITED [2017] NZSC 12 [17 February 2017] (PDF, 9 KB)
Substantive judgment
DAVID BROWN v NEW ZEALAND BASING LIMITED [2017] NZSC 139 [13 September 2 (PDF, 332 KB)
Case name
H v The Queen
Case number
SC 146/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 35 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that evidence of the complainant’s prior consistent statement was properly admitted at trial – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicant’s appeal against sentence. [2016] NZCA 413   CA498/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 18 August 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SAYED REZA HUSSAINI v R [2017] NZSC 122 [18 August 2017] (PDF, 82 KB)
Case name
Fonterra Co-operative Group Limited v McIntyre and Williamson Partnership & Ors
Case number
SC 150/2016
Summary
Civil appeal – s 106 Dairy Industry Restructuring Act 2001 - Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the respondents were “new entrants” for the purpose of s 106 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the appellant breached s 106 in offering the respondents the terms of supply set out in the milk supply agreements signed by the respondents.CA 736/2015    [2016] NZCA 538
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Fonterra Co Operative Group Ltd v McIntyre and Williamson Partnership [2016] NZCA 538).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was right to answer the following two questions in the affirmative:
(a) Were the respondents “new entrants” for the purposes of s 106 of the Dairy Industry Restructuring Act 2001?
(b) If so, did the appellant breach s 106 in offering the respondents the terms of supply set out in the milk supply agreements signed by the respondents?
10 April 2017
__________________
A The appeal is dismissed.  
B The appellant is to pay the respondents costs of $30,000 and reasonable disbursements to be determined by the Registrar if necessary.  We allow for second counsel.
21 December 2017
Transcripts
Media Releases
Court of Appeal decision
FONTERRA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP LIMITED v MCINTYRE AND WILLIAMSON PARTNERSHIP AND ORS [2016] NZCA 538 [16 November 2016]
Leave judgment - leave granted
FONTERRA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP LIMITED v MCINTYRE AND WILLIAMSON PARTNERSHIP AND OTHERS [2017] NZSC 47 [10 April 2017] (PDF, 59 KB)
Substantive judgment
FONTERRA CO-OPERATIVE GROUP LIMITED v MCINTYRE AND WILLIAMSON PARTNERSHIP AND OTHERS [2017] NZSC 197 [21 December 2017] (PDF, 554 KB)
Case name
Michael Kristian Olsen v The Queen
Case number
SC 152/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in rejecting the applicant’s claim of trial counsel error – Whether fresh evidence undermines the safety of the applicant’s conviction.                   [2016] NZCA 256   CA632/2014
Result
A The application for an extension of time is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 2 March 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
MICHAEL KRISTIAN OLSEN v R [2017] NZSC 18    2 March 2017 (PDF, 132 KB)
Judgment appealed from

OLSEN V R CA632/2014 [2015] NZCA 256    18 June 2015
Case name
Kamal Singh v The Queen
Case number
SC 153/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Evidence Act 2006, s 44 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of s 44. CA 197/2016  [2016] NZCA 552
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
24 March 2017
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
KAMAL SINGH v R [2017] NZSC 37 [24 March 2017] (PDF, 89 KB)
Judgment appealed from

SINGH v R [2016] NZCA 552   25 November 2016
Case name
Duncan John Napier and Sara Ann Napier v Torbay Holdings Limited and Torbay Rest Home Limited
Case number
SC 155/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Restitution – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicants were liable for money had and received – s 161 Employment Relations Act 2000 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that an action for negligence did not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Employment Relations Authority.CA 647/2015    [2016] NZCA 608
Result
A notice of abandonment having been filed the appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 06 April 2017
Judgment appealed from
Case name
K  v  Immigration and Protection Tribunal and Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Case number
SC 1/2015
Summary
Civil Appeal – Immigration – Whether the Court of Appeal failed to properly consider the evidence in breach of the Evidence Act 2006 – Whether the Court of Appeal misapplied ss 130 and 131 of the Immigration Act 2009 – Whether it was incorrect to dismiss the proceedings on a summary basis.[2014] NZCA 585 CA  500/214
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 14 May 2015
High Court decision
K v IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL [2014] NZHC 1800  1 August 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
K v IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL [2015] NZSC 61 [14 May 2015] (PDF, 78 KB)
Judgment appealed from

K V IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION TRIBUNAL CA500/2014 [2014] NZCA 585  2 December 2014
Page 46 of 137