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
Fiona Prasad v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development
Case number
SC 18/2006
Summary
Civil – social security – beneficiary owner and mortgagor of two flats on same property – beneficiary living in one flat and renting the other out – whether beneficiary’s “accommodation costs” encompasses total outgoings on the property, or only that portion of the outgoings referable to the flat occupied as a home – meaning of “premises” – Social Security Act 1964, s 61E CA 119/04 22 December 2005
Result
Leave to Appeal dismissed.
10 April 2006
10 April 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Marlene Patricia Te Wii Haggie v Piki Tawhaki Haggie
Case number
SC 20/2006
Summary
Civil – appeal against Family Court decision on division of relationship property – whether Family Court had jurisdiction to make the orders it did – land listed as general land on certificate of title – argued by applicant in Family Court and High Court that land is customary Maori land and that both courts lacked jurisdiction to determine the issue – whether Privy Council retains inherent jurisdiction under Article the Third of the Treaty of Waitangi or under ss5 and 6 of the Imperial Laws Application Act to determine the status of land – whether status of the land is in question because Crown never “acquired tenure by fair purchase” – whether the extinguishment of the right of appeal to the Privy Council was in breach of Article the Third of the Treaty of Waitangi and the principles of equity in s99 Judicature Act 1908 – whether applicant entitled to appeal to the Privy Council for status orders declaring land in question Maori land – whether Privy Council remains the “court of last resort for native sovereign proprietors” of land – applicant seeks declaration that abolition of appeals to Privy Council ineffective in respect of “native sovereign proprietors”.
Result
Application for leave to amend the application for leave to appeal and Leave to Appeal both dismissed. Costs to respondent of $2,500.
10 May 2006
10 May 2006
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
HAGGIE V HAGGIE SC 20/2006 [10 May 2006] (PDF, 19 KB)
Case name
Aotearoa International Limited v Paper Reclaim Limited
Case number
SC 28/2006
Summary
Civil – exclusion from export venture – whether Court of Appeal erred in its determination of an appropriate notice-of-termination period – whether Court of Appeal wrong to interfere with trial Judge’s finding that respondent’s sales of waste paper to third party for export was in breach of its contract with the applicant – whether Court of Appeal wrong to deny applicant equitable relief for loss arising from breach of fiduciary duty – whether Court of Appeal wrong to interfere with trial Judge’ s finding that respondent’s principals made false affidavits and gave false evidence in denying existence of contract and therefore whether Court of Appeal erred in setting aside costs awarded on an indemnity basis. CA 70/04 14 March 2006
Result
Leave to Appeal granted.
2 June 2006
2 June 2006
Transcripts
- Hearing date 5 March 2007 SC 25/ and SC 282006 (PDF, 604 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 26 (PDF, 89 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Supreme court decision
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Brett Ronald Larsen v Rick Dees Limited
Case number
SC 29/2006
Summary
Civil appeal – agreement for sale and purchase of ten residential units – delays in settlement - vendor issued settlement notice - notice specified that on receipt from purchaser of faxed bank cheque for settlement figure, title documents would be delivered – purchaser transferred funds electronically before the time limit but confirmation fax only received after time limit – Court of Appeal allowed appeal from decision of High Court in which purchaser’s claim for specific performance was dismissed on basis that purchaser had not settled in accordance with the settlement notice – whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the purchaser had fulfilled its obligation to settle in terms of the settlement notice - whether the Court of Appeal applied the correct provision of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979 with respect to the vendor’s entitlement to cancel. CA 82/05 13 March 2006
Result
Leave to Appeal granted. 2 June 2006 ____________________ The appeal is allowed and the judgment of the High Court dismissing the respondent’s claim is restored.
The appellant is awarded costs in this Court of $15,000 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar. The appellant is also awarded costs in the Court of Appeal of $6,000 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court. 1 June 2007
The appellant is awarded costs in this Court of $15,000 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar. The appellant is also awarded costs in the Court of Appeal of $6,000 and reasonable disbursements to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar of that Court. 1 June 2007
Leave judgment - leave granted
LARSEN V RICK DEES LIMITED SC 29/2006 [2 June 2006] (PDF, 13 KB)
Leave judgment - leave granted
Transcript
Judgment appealed from
Substantive judgment / Media release
Case name
Doreen Warnock & Combined Beneficiaries Union Inc v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development
Case number
SC 30/2006
Summary
Civil – social security – advances made to beneficiary for repair/maintenance of home – policy of the Department of Social Security (as it was then known) to charge interest on advances – whether the discretion to make advances “subject to such terms and conditions as the Director-General may determine” under Social Security Act 1964, s 125 empowers the Director-General to make an advance subject to the payment of interest where the payment of interest does not arise by necessary implication from the provisions of the Act – whether the interest component of an advance under s 125 was a tax – whether the Court of Appeal was in error to treat the common law approach to the charging of interest as being “not particularly helpful… in this particular instance.” CA 10/05 16 March 2006
Result
Leave to Appeal dismissed.
14 June 2006
14 June 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Michael David Kidd v Alexander Pieter Van Heeren
Case number
SC 32/2006
Summary
Civil – partial stay of proceedings – principles to be applied in lifting a discretionary stay – whether Court of Appeal erred in stating the test – issue estoppel, forum conveniens, and conflict of laws issues. CA 191/05 23 March 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Costs $2000 plus disbursements to the respondent.
26 June 2006
26 June 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
KIDD V VAN HEEREN SC 32/2006 [26 June 2006] (PDF, 94 KB)
Case name
The Secretary for Justice As the New Zealand Central Authority v HJ
Case number
SC 36/2006
Summary
Summary Civil appeal * Care of Children Act 2004 * children wrongfully removed to New Zealand by one parent * other parent made application for an order for children to be returned to Australia * statutory defence to an order available under s 106(1)(a) - whether the Court of Appeal erred in its construction of s 106(1)(a) * whether the Court of Appeal erred in its exercise of discretion under s 106(1)(a).
CA 149/04 11 April 2006
Result
Leave to appeal granted.
27 June 2006
___________________________
The appeal is dismissed. Costs are reserved
16 November 2006
Leave judgment - leave granted
Judgment appealed from
Transcript
Case name
David Charles Adams v The Queen
Case number
SC 37/2006
Summary
Criminal – appeal against conviction for fraudulently using a document (a GST return) for the purposes of obtaining a pecuniary advantage – applicant incorporated a company for the purposes of reducing ACC levies of clients – applicant secured set-off against company’s GST liability and avoided accounting for GST collected by company – whether Court of Appeal erred in refusing to accept defence (not raised at trial) that company not liable for GST as not carrying on a taxable activity as defined in s 6 Goods and Services Tax Act 1985 – constitutional consequences of acceptance of applicant’s argument adverted to by Court of Appeal. CA 313/05 12 April 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
21 July 2006
21 July 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
ADAMS v R SC 37/2006 [21 July 2006] (PDF, 74 KB)
Case name
Junior Farms Ltd v Hampton Securities Ltd (In Liquidation)
Case number
SC 38/2006
Summary
Civil – conveyancing transactions – damages awarded against first respondent for value of land for which first respondent failed to compensate appellant – whether quantum erroneously calculated by trial Judge – whether trial Judge mistaken as to how original purchase price had been calculated – trial Judge’s award, confirmed by Court of Appeal, less than half of the figure claimed by appellant and unchallenged at trial – Court of Appeal’s determinations on interest not challenged. CA 218/04, CA 258/04 12 April 2006
Result
The applications for leave to appeal by both the appellant and second respondent are dismissed.
16 August 2006
16 August 2006
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Commerce Commission v Fonterra Co-Operative Group Limited
Case number
SC 39/2006
Summary
Civil – dairy industry restructuring – raw milk regulations – whether “cost of capital rate” refers to cost of equity capital rate or to “Weighted Average Cost of Capital” – Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk) Regulations 2001, reg 9(1) CA 175/05 4 May 2006
Result
Application for leave to appeal granted.
17 August 2006
_____________________
The appeal is allowed and all relevant orders made in the courts below are set aside. A. The Court declares that the capital referred to in reg 9(1) of the Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk) Regulations 2001 is the respondent’s equity capital.
B. The respondent is to pay the appellant costs of $15,000 plus disbursements to be fixed, if necessary, by the Registrar. In the absence of agreement costs below are to be fixed by the courts below.
17 August 2006
_____________________
The appeal is allowed and all relevant orders made in the courts below are set aside. A. The Court declares that the capital referred to in reg 9(1) of the Dairy Industry Restructuring (Raw Milk) Regulations 2001 is the respondent’s equity capital.
B. The respondent is to pay the appellant costs of $15,000 plus disbursements to be fixed, if necessary, by the Registrar. In the absence of agreement costs below are to be fixed by the courts below.
Transcripts
- Hearing date 12 December 2006 (PDF, 332 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2007] NZSC 36 (PDF, 79 KB)
Substantive judgment
Judgment appealed from
Leave judgment - leave granted
Page 105 of 110