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.
4 September 2026
Case information summary (as at 4 September 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 116 KB)
Case information summary (as at 4 September 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 132 KB)
All years
Case name
Raymond Everest Hessell v The Queen
Case number
SC 102/2009
Summary
Criminal Appeal – The applicant appeals against sentence and aspects of the sentencing guidelines on discounts for guilty pleas issued by the Court of Appeal. The issues are: whether the Court of Appeal was right in the circumstances to issue a guideline judgment; if so, whether the guidelines are sufficiently flexible or unduly fetter the courts’ future sentencing discretion; whether a 33% discount to the defendant’s sentence is appropriate for a guilty plea at the “first reasonable opportunity”; whether lesser discounts are appropriate for guilty pleas at subsequent stages of the proceedings; whether an early guilty plea should be considered to be an indicator of remorse on the part of the accused or whether remorse should be assessed on its merits; whether credit should be given for remorse even though not given at “first reasonable opportunity”; whether the guidelines should apply to murder cases; whether guidance should be provided in applying guidelines. [2009] NZCA 450 CA 170/2009 2 October 2009
Result
The application for leave to appeal is granted. The approved ground of appeal is whether the discount for Mr Hessell’ s guilty plea was appropriately given in accordance with sentencing principles and the Sentencing Act 2002.
19 April 2010
__________________
Appeal dismissed.
16 November 2010
19 April 2010
__________________
Appeal dismissed.
16 November 2010
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
HESSELL v R SC 102/2009 [16 November 2010] (PDF, 212 KB)
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, William Young JJ.
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Peter Morrison Petryszick v The Queen
Case number
SC 103/2009
Summary
Criminal – Appeal against conviction – Criminal Procedure – Abuse of Process – Delay – Appellant granted adjournment by Court of Appeal on strict terms with which he failed to comply – Whether Court of Appeal erred in concluding no merit in grounds of appeal raised – Whether Court of Appeal erred in not affording the appellant additional time to investigate grounds of complaint.[2009] NZCA 515 CA 269/2008 27 October 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted on the question whether the applicant was denied his right to appeal.
20 April 2010
___________________
A The appeal is allowed and the order made by the Court of Appeal set aside. B The appellant’ s appeal against his conviction is remitted to the Court of Appeal for determination in accordance with s 385(1) of the Crimes Act 1961.
24 August 2010
20 April 2010
___________________
A The appeal is allowed and the order made by the Court of Appeal set aside. B The appellant’ s appeal against his conviction is remitted to the Court of Appeal for determination in accordance with s 385(1) of the Crimes Act 1961.
24 August 2010
Transcripts
- sc 103 2009 petryszick peter morrison v r (PDF, 431 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2010] NZSC 105 (PDF, 87 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
PETRYSZICK v R SC 103/2009 [24 August 2010] (PDF, 148 KB)
Substantive judgment / Media release
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ
Case name
Mana PropertyTrustee Ltd v James Development Ltd
Case number
SC 105/2009
Summary
Civil – Interpreting terms of a sale and purchase agreement – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by equating non-performance at the time of settlement with an automatic right to cancel – Whether the Court of Appeal were wrong to find that clause 18.3 of the agreement for sale and purchase was essential.[2009] NZCA 483 CA 241/2000 19 October 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
1 March 2010
______________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the respondent’ s purported cancellation on 3 November 2008 of its contract with the appellant was of no effect. The proceeding is remitted to the High Court for outstanding issues to be determined in light of this judgment. The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. Costs are reserved. Counsel should file memoranda.
23 July 2010
1 March 2010
______________________
Appeal allowed. It is declared that the respondent’ s purported cancellation on 3 November 2008 of its contract with the appellant was of no effect. The proceeding is remitted to the High Court for outstanding issues to be determined in light of this judgment. The costs order made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. Costs are reserved. Counsel should file memoranda.
23 July 2010
Media Releases
- sc 105 2009 mana v james 23 july 2010 (PDF, 85 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Substantive judgment /Media release
Judgment appealed from
Case name
MA v The Attorney General
Case number
SC 106/2009
Summary
Civil – the applicant was granted recognition of status as a refugee in 1996 and New Zealand citizenship in 1997 – in 2001 the applicant was discharged on the offence of making a false statement in his refugee claim – certain documents obtained by the Police in a search of the applicant’ s home were passed to the Refugee Status Branch of the New Zealand Immigration Service – in 2006 notice was given to the applicant of intended determination of revocation of refugee status – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the search of the applicant’s home was lawful – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that privilege did not attach to certain communications between the applicant and his refugee advisor – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that Police lawfully provided certain documents to the New Zealand Immigration Service.[2009] NZCA 490 CA 565/2007 20 October 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 31 March 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Attorney-General v Tamil X v Refugee Status Appeals Authority and Y
Case number
SC 107/2009
Summary
Immigration – whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting Article 1F of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees; whether the Court erred in not remitting an Article 1F inquiry to the Refugee Status Appeals Authority[2009] NZCA 488 CA 109/2008 20 October 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
10 March 2010
__________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The respondent’s application for recognition of refugee status is remitted to the Refugee Status Appeals Authority for consideration in accordance with the Court of Appeal’s order.
C Costs are reserved and counsel may submit memoranda if necessary.
27 August 2010
10 March 2010
__________________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B The respondent’s application for recognition of refugee status is remitted to the Refugee Status Appeals Authority for consideration in accordance with the Court of Appeal’s order.
C Costs are reserved and counsel may submit memoranda if necessary.
27 August 2010
Media Releases
- MR [2010] NZSC 107 (PDF, 84 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript
Elias CJ, Blanchard, Tipping, McGrath, Anderson JJ.
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Matthew John Birchler v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 116/2009
Summary
Criminal – appeal directly from the High Court under s 144A(1)(a) of the Summary Proceedings Act 1957 – intended appeal against the determination of the High Court by way of case stated under s 107 of the Summary Proceedings Act – whether direct appeal to the Supreme Court appropriate given that the Court of Appeal has previously refused leave to appeal on this point on the basis that there were no grounds for challenge to the well established interpretation of s 108 of the Summary Proceedings Act in Davis v Mingins (HC, Rot, AP 48/91, 30/10/91, Fisher J). CRI 2009 485 83 25 November 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 March 2010
_____________________________
Appeal allowed. Order made in the High Court remitting the matter for consideration in the District Court is quashed.
Reasons to be given later.
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment / Media release
Transcript
Case name
Douglas John Williamson and John Blackwood Williamson v Selwyn District Council
Case number
SC 118/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – security for costs – strike-out – summary judgment – Appeal against strike-out by Court of Appeal – appellants’ failure to pay security for costs – Appeal against application in High Court by Selwyn District Council (SDC) to recover possession of land – Appellants refused to vacate land on expiry of 3-year lease agreement as part of sale and purchase agreement of land to SDC – Whether sale and purchase agreement and lease void because SDC exerted duress/undue influence or obtained unconscionable bargain in abuse of dominant bargaining position, or acted in breach of Local Government Act 1974 – Whether the SDC breached Resource Management Act 1991 in obtaining non-notified resource consent – Whether lawyers acted in conflict of interest between appellants and SDC councillor and breached fiduciary duty – Whether appellants waived conflict of interest with informed consent.[2008] NZCA 147 CA 662/2007 5 June 2008
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 23 February 2010
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Supreme court decision
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Elders New Zealand Limited v PGG Wrightson Lmited
Case number
SC 7/2008
Summary
Civil – Contract Law – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that an amalgamation approved under Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993 has the legal consequences provided for in s 219 of that Act – Whether an amalgamating company is entitled to “pick and choose” between Part 13 and Part 15 of the Companies Act 1993 – Whether the terms of the amalgamation order created the effect prescribed in Part 13 even though the order was made pursuant to Part 15 – Whether the applicant was bound by the Part 15 order although the order did not state that the applicant was bound.[2007] NZCA 596 CA 277/06 21 December 2007
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
18 April 2008
_______________________
Appeal dismissed.Costs to respondent $15,000, together with reasonable disbursements.
5 December 2008
18 April 2008
_______________________
Appeal dismissed.Costs to respondent $15,000, together with reasonable disbursements.
5 December 2008
Media Releases
- sc 7 elders nz ltd v pggwrightson ltd press release (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Transcript
Case name
New Zealand Exchange Limited v Bank of New Zealand, Access Brokerage Limited (in liquidation) and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu
Case number
SC 13/2008
Summary
Civil – appeal from strike-out application – second respondent in liquidation, first and third respondents brought actions against NZX in contract and tort - whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that NZX owes personal duties of care to individual clients or to individual brokers, to protect each of them from economic loss due to broker’s dishonesty or negligence in relation to client funds held on trust – whether the Court of Appeal was right to find that the breach of such a duty (if owed) is sufficiently legally causative of loss – whether the Court of Appeal was correct in holding that the Securities Commission is the “primary regulator” of the New Zealand Stock Exchange, and not NZX.2008] NZCA 25 CA236/06 22 February 2008
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Transcript
Case name
Jonathan Nuki Lummis Jarden v The Queen
Case number
SC 14/2008
Summary
Criminal Appeal – conspiracy to supply methamphetamine – appeal against sentence - whether a Court should use sentencing guidelines based on actual supply of specified weights of drugs when considering a sentence for conspiracy to supply an unspecified quantity of drugs - whether the Court of Appeal considered such a distinction when dismissing the appeal to that Court[2008] NZCA 48 CA292/07 5 March 2008
Media Releases
- sc 14 2008 jarden v r (PDF, 86 KB)
Substantive judgment
JARDEN v R SC 14/2008 [28 August 2008] (PDF, 38 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
JARDEN v R SC 14/2008 [9 May 2008] (PDF, 12 KB)
Transcription
Dates
Application for leave to appeal granted.
9 May 2008
_________________________
Appeal allowed. Sentence of three years imprisonment
quashed. Sentence of two years six months imprisonment substituted.
28 August 2008
Page 22 of 33