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
Shane Charles Wenzel  v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against decision of District Court Judge ordering trial by Judge alone under s 361D of the Crimes Act 1961 – Whether the incorporation into s 361D(3)(b) of an accused’s right to trial by jury requires an assessment of the weight of an accused’s right to jury trial in the circumstances of the case and the potential length of any sentence that might be imposed on conviction – Whether the s 361D limit on an accused’s right to jury trial can be demonstratively justified under s 5 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990. [2009] NZCA 130   CA  31/2009   8 April 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 9 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WENZEL V R SC 38/2009 9 June 2009 (PDF, 14 KB)
Case name
Christopher Bede Ward v Diane Mary Ward
Case number
SC 40/2009
Summary
Civil – Family – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that an agreement for the sale and purchase of shares was a settlement for the purposes of s 182(1) of the Family Proceedings Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that for the purposes of s 182(6) of the Act a matrimonial property agreement was to be considered by itself and not as part of an overall transaction – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that access to s 182(1) could be gained where it was necessary in the interests of fairness and justice to do so, and thereafter the remedial discretion was a broad one to be exercised in the manner which achieved a fair result taking into account the total background – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to disallow Mr W’s separate property interests subsumed by the overall transaction.[2009] NZCA 139  CA 309/2008  9 April 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted  in part.
1 July 2009.
________________
Appeal dismissed. Costs of $15,000 to the respondent plus disbursements.
8 December 2009
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
WARD v WARD SC 40/2009 [1 July 2009] (PDF, 12 KB)
Substantive judgment
WARD v WARD SC 40/2009 [8 December 2009] (PDF, 225 KB)
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Attorney-General
Case number
SC 41/2009
Summary
Civil – Judicial Review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that as the Appellant was not a participant in the statutory scheme under review the Appellant did not possess public interest standing to review the identified pleaded decisions – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that s 27(1) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 has no application to decision making under the Official Information Act 1982CIV 2006 – 485-2161  20 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused.  Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent.
3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JEFFRIES V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL SC 41/2009 3 June 2009 (PDF, 12 KB)
Case name
William Patrick Jeffries v The Privacy Commissioner
Case number
SC 42/2009
Summary
Civil – Judicial Review – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that a barrister may not invoke the privilege of general immunity against civil liability in respect of his participation in court proceedings against the Privacy Commissioner in relation to the barrister’s preparation and conduct of court proceedings and thereafter – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that a barrister conducting litigation before a court comes within the definition of “agency” in s 2 of the Privacy Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that “any person” in s 91(4) of the Act includes persons who are not “agencies” pursuant to s 2 of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal was wrong to find that the Privacy Commissioner’s failure to abide her notice obligations under ss 70 and 73 of the Act was understandable and not a relevant consideration in assessing her decision-makingCIV 2006 – 485-860  22 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal refused.  Costs $2,500 plus disbursements to the respondent. 3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
JEFFRIES V THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL SC 41/2009 3 June 2009 (PDF, 12 KB)
Case name
Peter David Buddle v The Queen
Case number
SC 43/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Crimes Act 1961 – Sexual offending – Criminal procedure – Exercise of s 374 discretion to discharge jury without their giving of a verdict – Whether trial Judge had authority to discharge jury at first trial on “a hung jury aspect” – Whether second trial a nullity in respect of all charges – Whether miscarriage of justice established.[2009] NZCA 184 CA 416/2008  14 May 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
22 June 2009
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
BUDDLE v R SC 43/2009 [22 June 2009] (PDF, 9 KB)
Substantive judgment
BUDDLE v R SC 43/2009 [26 November 2009] (PDF, 132 KB)
 Result

Appeal allowed, Convictions set aside. New Trial ordered on three counts.

26 November 2009
 Hearing
13 August 2009
Case name
Alex Kwong Wong v The Queen
Case number
SC 44/2009
Summary
Criminal appeal – appeal against refusal to grant bail pending appeal – whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by applying the wrong test – whether the Court of Appeal erred in law by applying too rigid or too high a standard – whether the Court of Appeal failed properly to apply the correct statutory factors set out in ss 8 and 14 of the Bail Act 2000 – whether the Court of Appeal failed to take into account or accord due weight to the substantial miscarriage of justice allegedly suffered by the appellant[2009] NZCA 202 CA 190/2009    21 May 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
16 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
WONG V R SC 44/2009 16 June 2009 (PDF, 11 KB)
Case name
Cashmere Capital Limited v Patrick Kevin Carroll and others
Case number
SC 46/2009
Summary
Civil – Retirement Villages Act 2003 – retrospective operation of the Act – the Court of Appeal held that when there has been an Order in Council under s 103, the Registrar-General must note on the certificate of title to the land comprising the village that it is subject to s 22 of the Act, and that the expressed intention of Parliament was that the Act should operate retrospectively to 31 December 2002 – whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of ss 103 and 21 of the Act - whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that if the Registrar-General has registered Crossdale Village under s 21 of the Act then s 22 applied to the appellant and if the Registrar-General has not done so it should be performed forthwith.[2009] NZCA  185   CA 190/2007    15 May 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
24 July 2009
______________________
Appeal allowed, judgment of the Court of Appeal is set aisde. Costs of $5,000 plus disbursements to the appellant.
4 December 2009
Transcripts
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
CASHMERE CAPITAL LIMITED v CROSSDALE PROPERTIES LIMITED AND ORS SC 46/2009 [24 July 2009] (PDF, 10 KB)
Substantive judgment
CASHMERE CAPITAL LTD v PATRICK KEVIN CARROLL AND ORS SC 46/2009 [4 December 2009] (PDF, 189 KB)
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Solicitor-General
Case number
SC 48/2009
Summary
Civil/Criminal Appeal – Offences – Contempt of Court – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 – Appeal against decision committing appellant to prison for contempt – Whether Court of Appeal erred in holding contempt proceedings civil in nature – Whether appellant wrongly denied opportunity to elect trial by jury.[2009] NZCA  62   CA 447/2008    9 March 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
7 August 2009
______________________
The appeal is allowed and the order made by the Court of Appeal is quashed.  It is replaced by an order committing the appellant to prison for a term of a maximum of three months, subject to the proviso that the term of imprisonment will come to an immediate end if the appellant complies with the injunction issued on 5 May 2005 and made permanent on 23 December 2008 by the High Court at Auckland in the proceeding Korda Mentha v Siemer HC Auckland CIV-2005-404-1808, 23 December 2008 and if he also provides an undertaking to the High Court in a form approved by the High Court that he and Paragon Oil Services Ltd will continue to comply with that injunction for so long as it remains in force.  Mr Siemer is ordered to surrender to his bail at the High Court in Auckland no later than 4pm on 20 May 2010 unless by then he has complied with the injunction and provided that undertaking to the High Court in a form approved by it.
17 May 2010
____________________________
Application for recall of judgment dismissed.
11 June 2010
_____________________________
Further application for recall of judgment dismissed.
15 June 2010
Leave judgment - leave granted
SIEMER v SOLICITOR-GENERAL SC 48/2009 [7 August 2009] (PDF, 9 KB)
Substantive judgment
SIEMER v SOLICITOR-GENERAL SC 48/2009 [17 May 2010] (PDF, 159 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date : recusal 26 February 2017

Hearing date : 2 March 2010

Elias CJ, Blanchard, McGrath, Wilson, Anderson JJ

Case Number
SC 48/2009
Case name
Penelope Mary Bright v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 51/2009
Summary
Criminal – Trespass Act 1980 – appellant arrested and charged with the offence of trespass under ss 3(1) and 11(2)(a) of the Trespass Act following refusal to leave a Council meeting when asked to do so – appellant subsequently convicted in the District Court – whether the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act 1987 negates the Trespass Act since removal of a person under s 50 of the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act is a complete remedy in itself – whether the minimum threshold for convicting under the Trespass Act was not met because the appellant was never warned for trespass before being charged and convicted.[2009] NZCA  187  CA 796/2008    15 May 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 6 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BRIGHT V NEW ZEALAND POLICE SC 51/2009 6 August 2009 (PDF, 14 KB)
Case name
John Kenneth Slavich v The Queen
Case number
SC 52/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Fraud – Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – Judicature Act 1908 – Parallel application for leave to appeal – Whether miscarriage of justice established – Whether evidence wrongly admitted – Whether trial counsel’s conduct inappropriate.CRI 2006–419–89  12 October 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
10 August 2009.
_______________________
The recall application is dismissed.
15 March 2016
______________________________________
The application for recall of this Court’s judgment of
16 April 2020 (Slavich v R [2020] NZSC 34) is dismissed.
21 June 2024
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
SLAVICH V R SC 52/2009 10 August 2009 (PDF, 13 KB)
Recall judgment
SLAVICH v R SC 52/2009 [13 September 2011] (PDF, 45 KB)
Recall judgment
JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH v R [2016] NZSC 25 [15 March 2016] (PDF, 77 KB)
Supreme court decision
JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH v R [2020] NZSC 34 [16 April 2020] (PDF, 149 KB)
Recall judgment
JOHN KENNETH SLAVICH v R [2024] NZSC 72 [21 June 2024] (PDF, 194 KB)
Recall judgment
SLAVICH v R [2024] NZSC 175 [19 December 2024] (PDF, 187 KB)
Page 83 of 117