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.
17 August 2026
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 87 KB)
Case information summary (as at 17 August 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 128 KB)
All years
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
3 June 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
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
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
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
- Hearing date 5 November 2009 (PDF, 559 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2009] NZSC 123 (PDF, 58 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Benjamin Morland Easton v Broadcasting Commission and Broadcasting Standards Authority
Case number
SC 55/2009
Summary
Civil – Security for costs – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in requiring security for costs before hearing – Whether the Court of Appeal’s requirement for security of costs amounts to an unreasonable barrier to Court access and is discriminatory – Whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss allegedly “uncontested evidence”[2009] NZCA 252 CA 793/2008 17 June 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 5 August 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Wyeth (NZ) Limited v Ancare New Zealand Limited and The Environmental Risk Management Authority
Case number
SC 57/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal - Statutory Interpretation - whether the Court of Appeal erred in interpreting the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996; whether the Act requires or entitles the Environmental Risk Management Authority to refuse to disclose the identity of a hazardous substance and/or its chemical composition; whether the Act allows the Environmental Risk Management Authority to require that the identity of a hazardous substance and/or its chemical composition be provided on the basis of confidentiality undertakings. [2009] NZCA 211 CA 424/2007 27 May 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
25 September 2009
______________________
The appeal is dismissed with no order for costs.
23 April 2010
25 September 2009
______________________
The appeal is dismissed with no order for costs.
23 April 2010
Transcripts
- Hearing date 8 February 2010 (PDF, 600 KB)
Media Releases
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Talbot 2002 Underwriting Capital Limited v Maintenance Technology and Engineering Limited
Case number
SC 61/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing the applicant’s application for a priority fixture and/or for a stay pending determination of the appeal on the grounds of bias on the part of a Judge who has embarked upon the hearing of a case to which the appellant is a party in the High Court.CA 327/2009 16 June 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to respondent. 14 July 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Slawomir Ryszard Bujak v The District Court at Christchurch and The Republic of Poland
Case number
SC 64/2009
Summary
Civil – extradition - whether Court of Appeal erred in refusing to admit new evidence – whether Court of Appeal erred in determining that by joining an extradition Treaty New Zealand has accepted that the court system in the partner state is robust enough to grant a fair trial – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that comity interest must be balanced against, and could somehow trump, an individual’s liberty rights – whether the Court of Appeal erred in deciding that the ‘ copies’ provided by the second respondent sufficed for extradition from New Zealand purposes – whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that the requisite authentication procedures were followed and that the evidence against the Appellant was not hearsay – whether the Court of Appeal failed to consider relevant case law provided by counsel. [2009] NZCA 257 CA 678/2008 19 June 2009.
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Any application for costs to be made within 10 working days.
15 September 2009
________________
Order for costs to the 2nd respondent in the sum of $2,000.
15 October 2009
15 September 2009
________________
Order for costs to the 2nd respondent in the sum of $2,000.
15 October 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Additional document
Case name
Lewtyn Michael Scott v Rosemary Ann Scott and others
Case number
SC 65/2009
Summary
Civil – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its exercise of discretion declining the application for grant of an extension under r 43 of the Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal was entitled to make that decision in the absence of the applicant or his counsel.[2009] NZCA 255 CA 634/2008 19 June 2009.
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs of $7,500 and disbursements to the respondents. 29 October 2009
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Transcript
Case name
John Carr Laidlaw and Carol Anne Laidlaw v Geoffret Francis Parsonage and Timothy John Goulding
Case number
SC 67/2009
Summary
Civil appeal – contract law - Whether a nominee is entitled to enforce a contract; Whether the phrase "or nominee" is a sufficient designation for purposes of s 4 of the Contracts (Privity) Act 1982.[2009] NZCA 291 CA 304 /2008 9 July 2009
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2,500 to the respondents. 21 September 2009
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Michael Peter Stiassney and Korda Mentha
Case number
SC 69/2009
Summary
Civil Appeal – natural justice – orders were made in the High Court against the applicant, the publisher of several websites, in respect of a defamation claim – whether the High Court judge was correct to allow an amended statement of claim to be filed and proceed to an ex parte hearing on 8 October 2008 – whether the High Court judge erred in awarding the respondent $940,000 in damages plus costs and issuing a permanent injunction against the applicant prohibiting several defamatory publications – whether the High Court judge misrepresented evidence in finding against the applicant.Civ 2005 404 001808 23 December 2009
Result
Notice of abandonment being lodged, the application is deemed to be dismissed
Page 96 of 110