Supreme Court case information

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.

ORDER PROHIBITING PUBLICATION OF THE JUDGMENT AND ANY PART OF THE PROCEEDINGS (INCLUDING THE RESULT) IN NEWS MEDIA OR ON THE INTERNET OR OTHER PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DATABASE UNTIL FINAL DISPOSITION OF TRIAL. PUBLICATION IN LAW REPORT OR LAW DIGEST PERMITTED.
21 November 2025

Civil Appeal

A The application for leave to appeal by Ms Fleming is granted in part to the extent described below (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:
(i) to determine that Ms Fleming was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000; and
(ii) as to the test for “work” when work is conducted by homeworkers who work overnight in their home.
C The application for leave to appeal by Mr Humphreys is granted (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
D The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to determine that Mr Humphreys was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 for the period from August 2020 onwards when in receipt of funding under the Individualised Funding scheme.
E Counsel in both appeals are asked to address the matters set out at [1]–[2] below.
4 October 2024
_________________________________________________

A Ms Fleming’s appeal (SC 42/2024) is allowed. 
B The Employment Court declaration as to Ms Fleming’s  employee status is reinstated.
C The question of determination of the quantum of remedies  for Ms Fleming is remitted to the Employment Court.
D Mr Humphreys’ appeal (SC 44/2024) is allowed. 
E The Employment Court declaration as to Mr Humphreys’  employee status is reinstated.
F The first respondent must pay the appellant in SC 44/2024 costs of $50,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
G Subject to Order F, costs in SC 42/2024 and SC 44/2024 are otherwise reserved. If parties cannot agree on costs, counsel are to file memoranda (maximum of 5 pages) on costs; counsel for Ms Fleming by 5 February 2026 and each of the respondents by 19 February 2026.
9 December 2025

Civil Appeal

A The application for leave to appeal by Ms Fleming is granted in part to the extent described below (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
B The approved questions are whether the Court of Appeal was correct:
(i) to determine that Ms Fleming was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000; and
(ii) as to the test for “work” when work is conducted by homeworkers who work overnight in their home.
C The application for leave to appeal by Mr Humphreys is granted (Attorney-General v Fleming [2024] NZCA 92).
D The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to determine that Mr Humphreys was not “engaged, employed or contracted” by the Ministry of Health | Manatū Hauora as a “homeworker” under s 5 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 for the period from August 2020 onwards when in receipt of funding under the Individualised Funding scheme.
E Counsel in both appeals are asked to address the matters set out at [1]–[2] below.
4 October 2024
_______________________________________________________________
A Ms Fleming’s appeal (SC 42/2024) is allowed. 
B The Employment Court declaration as to Ms Fleming’s  employee status is reinstated.
C The question of determination of the quantum of remedies  for Ms Fleming is remitted to the Employment Court.
D Mr Humphreys’ appeal (SC 44/2024) is allowed. 
E The Employment Court declaration as to Mr Humphreys’  employee status is reinstated.
F The first respondent must pay the appellant in SC 44/2024 costs of $50,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
G Subject to Order F, costs in SC 42/2024 and SC 44/2024 are otherwise reserved. If parties cannot agree on costs, counsel are to file memoranda (maximum of 5 pages) on costs; counsel for Ms Fleming by 5 February 2026 and each of the respondents by 19 February 2026.
9 December 2025

Civil Appeal 

A    Kea Investments Ltd’s application for leave to appeal is granted (Wikeley v Kea Investments Ltd [2024] NZCA 609, [2024] 3 NZLR 901).
B    The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to discharge the permanent anti-suit and anti-enforcement injunctions awarded to Kea Investments Ltd in the High Court.
C    Counsel to assist the Court will be appointed by the Registrar.
D    The applications to adduce further evidence are dismissed.
E    The application to extend the stay in Wikeley v Kea Investments Ltd [2024] NZCA 686, (2024) 26 PRNZ 667 is granted pending determination of the appeal. 
 4 July 2025
_______________________________________
A The application for adjournment is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.                                                                                
30 September 2025
_______________________________________

A The appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal in Wikeley v Kea Investments Ltd [2024] NZCA 609, [2024] 3 NZLR 901 is allowed.
B The orders made by the High Court in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley Family Trustee Ltd (in interim liq) [2023] NZHC 3260 at [156(a)(i) - (iv)], and in Kea Investments Ltd v Wikeley Family Trustee Ltd (in interim liq) [2023] NZHC 3532 at [7], are reinstated.
C Costs are reserved. 
10 November 2025

Civil Appeal

The applications for leave to appeal are granted (Whakatōhea Kotahitanga Waka (Edwards) v Te Kāhui and Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board [2023] NZCA 504) on the question of the correctness of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
17 April 2024
______________________________________________________
A The application by Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou for leave to intervene is granted.
B Costs are reserved on this application and on the substantive hearing.
23 July 2024
______________________________________________________
A The application by Te Kāhui Takutai Moana o Ngā Whānau me Ngā Hapū o Te Whakatōhea for a prospective costs order against the Attorney-General is granted.
B The respondent must pay the applicants prospective costs of $97,500, collectively.
C The respondent must pay the applicants costs on the application of $7,500 together with usual disbursements.
20 September 2024
_______________________________________________
A The appeal (by the Attorney-General in relation to s 58 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011) is allowed.
B Costs are reserved.
2 December 2024
_______________________________________________
A The Attorney-General’s appeals on the navigable rivers issue and challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muriwai are dismissed.
B With the qualification that the part of WKW’s appeal regarding the boundaries of CMT Order 1 does not need to be determined, WKW’s appeal is dismissed.
C Te Upokorehe’s appeals are dismissed.
D Ngāti Muriwai’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [258].
E Ngāti Ruatākenga’s appeal challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muirwai is dismissed.
F Kuatere Marae’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [271].
G Te Kāhui’s appeal in relation to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is allowed. The question of whether the test for CMT under s 58 of MACA is met in regard to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is remitted to the High Court for reconsideration.
H To the extent it remains live, Te Kahui’s appeal in relation to the decision to remit CMT Order 1 to the High Court is dismissed.
I CMT Order 2 is formally amended to capture the Ōhiwa Harbour in full.
J Whakatāne District Council, and Ngāti Muriwai and Kutarere Marae’s applications to adduce further evidence are allowed.
K The application by Te Kāhui to adduce further evidence is to be addressed by the High Court.
L The applications to file submissions out of time are allowed.
M Costs are reserved. If costs cannot be agreed, the parties should file memoranda on costs on or before Friday 10 October 2025.                                      
15 August 2025

Civil Appeal

The applications for leave to appeal are granted (Whakatōhea Kotahitanga Waka (Edwards) v Te Kāhui and Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board [2023] NZCA 504) on the question of the correctness of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
17 April 2024
____________________________________________
A The application by Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou for leave to intervene is granted.
B Costs are reserved on this application and on the substantive hearing.
23 July 2024
____________________________________________
A The application by Te Kāhui Takutai Moana o Ngā Whānau me Ngā Hapū o Te Whakatōhea for a prospective costs order against the Attorney-General is granted.
B The respondent must pay the applicants prospective costs of $97,500, collectively.
C The respondent must pay the applicants costs on the application of $7,500 together with usual disbursements.
20 September 2024
_____________________________________________________
A The appeal (by the Attorney-General in relation to s 58 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011) is allowed.
B Costs are reserved.
2 December 2024
_____________________________________________________
A The Attorney-General’s appeals on the navigable rivers issue and challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muriwai are dismissed.
B With the qualification that the part of WKW’s appeal regarding the boundaries of CMT Order 1 does not need to be determined, WKW’s appeal is dismissed.
C Te Upokorehe’s appeals are dismissed.
D Ngāti Muriwai’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [258].
E Ngāti Ruatākenga’s appeal challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muirwai is dismissed.
F Kuatere Marae’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [271].
G Te Kāhui’s appeal in relation to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is allowed. The question of whether the test for CMT under s 58 of MACA is met in regard to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is remitted to the High Court for reconsideration.
H To the extent it remains live, Te Kahui’s appeal in relation to the decision to remit CMT Order 1 to the High Court is dismissed.
I CMT Order 2 is formally amended to capture the Ōhiwa Harbour in full.
J Whakatāne District Council, and Ngāti Muriwai and Kutarere Marae’s applications to adduce further evidence are allowed.
K The application by Te Kāhui to adduce further evidence is to be addressed by the High Court.
L The applications to file submissions out of time are allowed.
M Costs are reserved. If costs cannot be agreed, the parties should file memoranda on costs on or before Friday 10 October 2025.                                      
15 August 2025

Civil Appeal

The applications for leave to appeal are granted (Whakatōhea Kotahitanga Waka (Edwards) v Te Kāhui and Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board [2023] NZCA 504) on the question of the correctness of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
17 April 2024
_____________________________________________________
A The application by Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou for leave to intervene is granted.
B Costs are reserved on this application and on the substantive hearing.
23 July 2024
_____________________________________________________
A The application by Te Kāhui Takutai Moana o Ngā Whānau me Ngā Hapū o Te Whakatōhea for a prospective costs order against the Attorney-General is granted.
B The respondent must pay the applicants prospective costs of $97,500, collectively.
C The respondent must pay the applicants costs on the application of $7,500 together with usual disbursements.
20 September 2024
___________________________________________
A The appeal (by the Attorney-General in relation to s 58 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011) is allowed.
B Costs are reserved.
2 December 2024
___________________________________________
A The Attorney-General’s appeals on the navigable rivers issue and challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muriwai are dismissed.
B With the qualification that the part of WKW’s appeal regarding the boundaries of CMT Order 1 does not need to be determined, WKW’s appeal is dismissed.
C Te Upokorehe’s appeals are dismissed.
D Ngāti Muriwai’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [258].
E Ngāti Ruatākenga’s appeal challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muirwai is dismissed.
F Kuatere Marae’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [271].
G Te Kāhui’s appeal in relation to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is allowed. The question of whether the test for CMT under s 58 of MACA is met in regard to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is remitted to the High Court for reconsideration.
H To the extent it remains live, Te Kahui’s appeal in relation to the decision to remit CMT Order 1 to the High Court is dismissed.
I CMT Order 2 is formally amended to capture the Ōhiwa Harbour in full.
J Whakatāne District Council, and Ngāti Muriwai and Kutarere Marae’s applications to adduce further evidence are allowed.
K The application by Te Kāhui to adduce further evidence is to be addressed by the High Court.
L The applications to file submissions out of time are allowed.
M Costs are reserved. If costs cannot be agreed, the parties should file memoranda on costs on or before Friday 10 October 2025.                                      
15 August 2025

Civil Appeal

The applications for leave to appeal are granted (Whakatōhea Kotahitanga Waka (Edwards) v Te Kāhui and Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board [2023] NZCA 504) on the question of the correctness of the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
17 April 2024
________________________________________________________________________________
A The application by Ngā Hapū o Ngāti Porou for leave to intervene is granted.
B Costs are reserved on this application and on the substantive hearing.
23 July 2024
________________________________________________________________________________
A The application by Te Kāhui Takutai Moana o Ngā Whānau me Ngā Hapū o Te Whakatōhea for a prospective costs order against the Attorney-General is granted.
B The respondent must pay the applicants prospective costs of $97,500, collectively.
C The respondent must pay the applicants costs on the application of $7,500 together with usual disbursements.
20 September 2024
____________________________________________
A The appeal (by the Attorney-General in relation to s 58 of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011) is allowed.
B Costs are reserved.
2 December 2024
____________________________________________
A The Attorney-General’s appeals on the navigable rivers issue and challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muriwai are dismissed.
B With the qualification that the part of WKW’s appeal regarding the boundaries of CMT Order 1 does not need to be determined, WKW’s appeal is dismissed.
C Te Upokorehe’s appeals are dismissed.
D Ngāti Muriwai’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [258].
E Ngāti Ruatākenga’s appeal challenging the award of PCRs to Ngāti Muirwai is dismissed.
F Kuatere Marae’s appeal is allowed on the terms set out below at [271].
G Te Kāhui’s appeal in relation to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is allowed. The question of whether the test for CMT under s 58 of MACA is met in regard to Whakaari and Te Paepae o Aotea is remitted to the High Court for reconsideration.
H To the extent it remains live, Te Kahui’s appeal in relation to the decision to remit CMT Order 1 to the High Court is dismissed.
I CMT Order 2 is formally amended to capture the Ōhiwa Harbour in full.
J Whakatāne District Council, and Ngāti Muriwai and Kutarere Marae’s applications to adduce further evidence are allowed.
K The application by Te Kāhui to adduce further evidence is to be addressed by the High Court.
L The applications to file submissions out of time are allowed.
M Costs are reserved. If costs cannot be agreed, the parties should file memoranda on costs on or before Friday 10 October 2025.                                      
15 August 2025