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
Damin Peter Cook v The King
Case number
SC 120/2023
Summary

Criminal Appeal
Result

A The application for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is granted (Cook v R [2023] NZCA 342).
C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to treat Mr Cook’s defence as insane automatism.
19 February 2024
_______________________________________________________________________
The appeal is dismissed.
28 April 2025
Date of hearing
23 July 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, Williams, Kós and O'Regan JJ
Submissions from counsel
Transcripts
Case Synopses
Media Releases
Substantive judgment
COOK v R [2025] NZSC 44 [28 April 2025] (PDF, 582 KB)
District Court decision
[2022] NZDC 17588
Court of Appeal decision
COOK v R [2023] NZCA 342 [4 August 2023]
Leave judgment - leave granted
DAMIN PETER COOK v R [2024] NZSC 12 [19 February 2024] (PDF, 136 KB)
Videos
Case name
Brett David Grinder v Attorney-General and New Zealand Parole Board
Case number
SC 147/2023
Summary

Civil Appeal
Result

A Leave to appeal is granted (Attorney-General v Grinder [2023] NZCA 596).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to allow the appeal and in particular the proper approach to the imposition, variation or discharge of special conditions when a person subject to preventive detention is granted release on parole.
6 May 2024

________________________________________________________________

A The appeal is allowed. The decision of the Court of Appeal is set aside. The finding of the High Court that the issue for the Board on any reconsideration of the appellant’s conditions is as set out in the decision of Gwyn J at [130(a)–(b)] is reinstated.
B The respondents must pay the appellant one set of costs of $30,000 plus usual disbursements, provided that the amount does not exceed the amount paid by the Legal Services Commissioner for the appellant to bring this appeal. We allow for second counsel. If the amount paid by the Legal Services Commissioner is less than $30,000 plus usual disbursements, the respondents must pay the appellant one set of costs equal to that lesser amount.
18 November 2025
Date of hearing
22 October 2024
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Ellen France, Williams, Kós & Miller JJ
Submissions from counsel
Transcripts
Case Synopses
Media Releases
High Court decision
GRINDER v NEW ZEALAND PAROLE BOARD [2022] NZHC 3188 [30 November 2022]
Court of Appeal decision
ATTORNEY-GENERAL v GRINDER [2023] NZCA 596 [24 November 2023]
Leave judgment - leave granted
BRETT DAVID GRINDER v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2024] NZSC 50 [6 May 2024] (PDF, 137 KB)
Supreme court decision
GRINDER v ATTORNEY-GENERAL [2025] NZSC 165 [18 November 2025] (PDF, 479 KB)
Videos
Case name
Kaine Van Hemert v The King
Case number
SC 38/2022
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A The applications for an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against the decision of the Court of Appeal (R v Van Hemert [2021] NZCA 261) [the Court of Appeal judgment] and the decision of the High Court (R v Van Hemert [2021] NZHC 2877) resentencing Mr Van Hemert [the resentencing judgment] are granted.

B Leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal judgment and the resentencing judgment is granted.

C The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that the presumption in favour of life imprisonment in s 102 of the Sentencing Act 2002 was not displaced given the circumstances of the offence and of the applicant.
3 August 2022
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A The appeal against sentence is allowed.
B The minimum period of imprisonment of 11 years and six months is quashed and a minimum period of imprisonment of 10 years is substituted.
31 August 2023
Date of hearing
18 November 2022
Judges
Glazebrook, O’Regan, Ellen France, Williams and Kós JJ
Submissions from counsel
Transcripts
Case Synopses
Media Releases
High Court decision
R v VAN HEMERT [2021] NZHC 2877 [28 October 2021]
Leave judgment - leave granted
KAINE VAN HEMERT v R [2022] NZSC 94 [3 August 2022] (PDF, 191 KB)
Substantive judgment
KAINE VAN HEMERT v R [2023] NZSC 116 [31 August 2023] (PDF, 471 KB)
Case name
ANZ Bank New Zealand Limited v Financial Markets Authority
Case number
SC 13/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the Financial Market Authority’s disclosure of confidential documents obtained from ANZ to third parties was for a permitted purpose under s 59(3) under the Financial Markets Authority Act 2011.
Result
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 13/2019 and SC  21/2019 are dismissed.  
B Costs of $3,500 are awarded to the respondent.
12 April 2019
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ANZ BANK NEW ZEALAND LIMITED v FINANCIAL MARKETS AUTHORITY [2019] NZSC 40[12 April 2019] (PDF, 211 KB)
Case name
Eight Mile Style, LLC & Martin Affiliated, LLC v New Zealand National Party and Greg Hamilton
Case number
SC 15/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Copyright Act 1994, s 121– User principle – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its application of damages principles.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay costs of $4,500 plus usual disbursements to the respondents collectively.
14 May 2019
High Court decision
EIGHT MILE STYLE v NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL PARTY [2017] NZHC 2603 [25 October 2017]
Court of Appeal decision
THE NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL PARTY v EIGHT MILE STYLE, LLC [2018] NZCA 596 [18 December 2018]
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
EIGHT MILE STYLE, LLC v NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL PARTY [2019] NZSC 48 [14 May 2019) (PDF, 207 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date 2 May 2019
Case name
Brooke Christie Rolleston v The Queen
Case number
SC 17/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether a member of the jury appeared biased – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted to the applicants (Rolleston v R [2018] NZCA 611).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals.
21 March 2019
_________________________
A  The application to cross-examine the foreperson is dismissed.
B  The appeals are dismissed.
C  Existing suppression orders in respect of the minutes issued in relation to this matter remain in place but are varied to continue until further order of this Court.                                                                                                                             
19 November 2019
Date of hearing
13 November 2019
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
Media Releases
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
ROLLESTON & ROCHE v R [2018] NZCA 611 [19 December 2018]
Leave judgment - leave granted
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 32 [21 March 2019] (PDF, 30 KB)
Supreme Court - order made
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 61 [26 June 2019] (PDF, 148 KB)
Additional document
Transcript hearing date 13 November 2019
Substantive judgment
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 129 [19 November 2019] (PDF, 36 KB)
Additional document
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2020] NZSC 113 (reasons) [19 October 2020] (PDF, 384 KB)
Additional document
Media Release BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2020] NZSC 113 [19 October 2020] reasons (PDF, 190 KB)
Case name
Brandon James Roche v The Queen
Case number
SC 18/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether a member of the jury appeared biased – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted to the applicants (Rolleston v R [2018] NZCA 611).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the conviction appeals.
21 March 2019
____________________
A  The application to cross-examine the foreperson is dismissed.
B  The appeals are dismissed.
C  Existing suppression orders in respect of the minutes issued in relation to this matter remain in place but are varied to continue until further order of this Court.
19 November 2019
Date of hearing
13 November 2019
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
Media Releases
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
ROLLESTON & ROCHE v R [2018] NZCA 611 [19 December 2018]
Leave judgment - leave granted
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 32 [21 March 2019] (PDF, 30 KB)
Supreme Court - order made
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 61 [26 June 2019] (PDF, 148 KB)
Substantive judgment
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R [2019] NZSC 129 [19 November 2019] (PDF, 36 KB)
Additional document
Transcript hearing 30 November 2019
Additional document
BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R (reasons) [2020] NZSC 113 [19 October 2020] (PDF, 384 KB)
Additional document
Media release BROOKE CHRISTIE ROLLESTON v R (reasons) [2020] NZSC 113 [19 October 2020] (PDF, 190 KB)
Case name
The Queen v Maurice William Reti and Logan Aaron Wood
Case number
SC 23/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is granted (Reti v R [2019] NZCA 17).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the evidence obtained pursuant to the production order of 4 August 2016 and pursuant to the execution of the search warrant on 1 November 2016 was inadmissible at the trial.
C 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.
4 April 2019
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A The appeal is dismissed.
B We make an 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.
5 March 2020
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave granted
R v MAURICE WILLIAM RETI [2019] NZSC 36 [4 April 2019] (PDF, 182 KB)
Substantive judgment
R v MAURICE WILLIAM JOHN RETI [2020] NZSC 16 [5 March 2020] (PDF, 211 KB)
Date of hearing

23 July 2019

Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Case name
Blue Reach Services Limited and Blue Reach Wireless Limited v Spark New Zealand Trading Limited
Case number
SC 24/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to uphold a decision of the High Court striking out the applicants’ claim on the basis it could not succeed by virtue of s 106 of the Commerce Act 1986.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $4,500 plus usual disbursements.
28 June 2019
High Court decision
BLUE REACH SERVICES LTD v SPARK NEW ZEALAND TRADING LTD [2018] NZHC 847 [30 April 2018]
Court of Appeal decision
BLUE REACH SERVICES AND BLUE REACH WIRELESS LIMITED v SPARK NEW ZEALAND TRADING LIMITED [2019] NZCA 2 [12 February 2019]
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
BLUE REACH SERVICES LIMITED AND BLUE REACH WIRELESS LIMITED v SPARK NEW ZEALANDTRADING LIMITED [2019] NZSC 65 [28 June 2019] (PDF, 215 KB)
Transcript

Hearing 21 June 2019

O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Case name
FTG Securities Limited v Bank of New Zealand, Stephen John Tubbs, Colin Anthony Gower and Robert Bruce Walker
Case number
SC 27/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether a prohibition on assignment of a deed of priority and subordination without the consent of the other party is enforceable – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to make declarations as to the interpretation of the deed of priority and subordination.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay costs of $4,500 to the respondents (to be shared equally between the first and third respondents unless they agree otherwise) plus usual disbursements.
26 August 2019
District Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
FTG SECURITIES LIMITED v BANK OF NEW ZEALAND [2019] NZCA 16 [20 February 2019]
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
FTG SECURITIES LIMITED v BANK OF NEW ZEALAND [2019] NZSC 93 [26 August 2019] (PDF, 49 KB)
Transcript

Hearing date 25 July 2019

Winkelmann CJ, O'Regan and Williams JJ
Page 4 of 32