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
Ngāi Tai Ki Tāmaki Tribal Trust v Minister of Conservation, Fullers Group Limited and Motutapu Island Restoration Trust
Case number
SC 11/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Conservation Act 1987 and Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act 2000 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding that concessions to conduct guided tours over Rangitoto and Motutapu could be granted despite iwi objections.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki Tribal Trust v Minister of Conservation [2017] NZCA 613).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal of the applicant to that Court.
8 May 2018
______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B We direct that the second respondent’ s application for a concession be reconsidered by the first respondent’ s delegate in light of this judgment. The licence awarded to the second respondent on 31 August 2015 will remain in force until that reconsideration has occurred.
C The decision of the first respondent’s delegate granting a permit to the third respondent dated 15 October 2015 is quashed. We direct that the third respondent’s application for a concession be reconsidered by the first respondent’s delegate in light of this judgment.
D Costs are reserved.
14 December 2018
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal of the applicant to that Court.
8 May 2018
______________________
A The appeal is allowed.
B We direct that the second respondent’ s application for a concession be reconsidered by the first respondent’ s delegate in light of this judgment. The licence awarded to the second respondent on 31 August 2015 will remain in force until that reconsideration has occurred.
C The decision of the first respondent’s delegate granting a permit to the third respondent dated 15 October 2015 is quashed. We direct that the third respondent’s application for a concession be reconsidered by the first respondent’s delegate in light of this judgment.
D Costs are reserved.
14 December 2018
Transcripts
- Hearing date 14 August 2018 (PDF, 646 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2018] NZSC 122 (PDF, 260 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
AN v Bupa Care Services NZ Limited and District Court at Manukau
Case number
SC 12/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the High Court erred in refusing to allow the applicant to file an application for habeas corpus – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in concluding the applicant’s appeal should not be given precedence, per s 17(1) of the Habeas Corpus Act 2001.
Result
A The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed. B No order as to costs. 19 March 2018 _____________________ The application for recall is dismissed. 22 March 2018
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Case name
Nobilangelo Ceramalus v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and The Minister of Immigration
Case number
SC 15/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Immigration Act 2009 – Whether the High Court Judge erred in striking out the applicant’s application for review of Immigration New Zealand’s refusal to grant a visa.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents. 27 March 2018
High Court decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Peter Richard Prescott v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 18/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against the decision of the Deputy Registrar to not waive a filing fee.
Result
A The applicant’s applications for leave to appeal and to set aside the High Court judgment are dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
9 May 2018
B The applicant is to pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
9 May 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Christopher Joseph O'Neill v Kit Toogood, Cecil Harding Croucher and Matt Amon
Case number
SC 19/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether Court of Appeal erred in declining to recall its judgment refusing to grant the applicant extension of time to apply for leave to appeal to that Court.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents.
17 April 2018
B The applicant is to pay costs of $2,500 to the respondents.
17 April 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Colin Graeme Craig v Jordan Henry Williams
Case number
SC 21/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Defamation – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in setting aside the decision of the High Court to order a full retrial – (cross-appeal) Whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the High Court’ s order setting aside the jury’s verdict on damages.
Result
A Leave to appeal and leave to cross appeal is granted (Williams v Craig [2018] NZCA 31).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the appeal to that Court in part and dismissing the cross appeal to that Court.
4 July 2018
_________________
A The appeal is allowed. The orders of the Court of Appeal entering judgment for the respondent on liability and directing a retrial of the respondent’s claim for damages are set aside. An order for a general retrial on liability and damages is substituted.
B The cross-appeal is dismissed.
C The respondent must pay the appellant costs of $35,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
D The costs award made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. If costs in that Court cannot be agreed they should be set by the Court of Appeal in light of this judgment. Any costs issues arising in the High Court shall be considered by the High Court in light of this judgment.
11 April 2019
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in allowing the appeal to that Court in part and dismissing the cross appeal to that Court.
4 July 2018
_________________
A The appeal is allowed. The orders of the Court of Appeal entering judgment for the respondent on liability and directing a retrial of the respondent’s claim for damages are set aside. An order for a general retrial on liability and damages is substituted.
B The cross-appeal is dismissed.
C The respondent must pay the appellant costs of $35,000 plus usual disbursements. We allow for second counsel.
D The costs award made in the Court of Appeal is set aside. If costs in that Court cannot be agreed they should be set by the Court of Appeal in light of this judgment. Any costs issues arising in the High Court shall be considered by the High Court in light of this judgment.
11 April 2019
Transcripts
- Hearing date 4-5 September 2018 (PDF, 895 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2019] NZSC 38 (PDF, 293 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Recall judgment
Additional document
Case name
Jeremy James McGuire v The Secretary for Justice
Case number
SC 22/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Legal Services Act 2011 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in striking out the applicant’s application for judicial review – Whether a self-represented litigant who is a practising lawyer can receive a costs award.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (McGuire v The Secretary for Justice [2018] NZCA 37)
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal and allow the cross-appeal
12 June 2018
_______________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
27 November 2018
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the appeal and allow the cross-appeal
12 June 2018
_______________________
A The appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
27 November 2018
Transcripts
- Hearing date 1 August 2018 (PDF, 407 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2018] NZSC 116 (PDF, 293 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Patty Tzu Chou Lin v Commissioner of Inland Revenue
Case number
SC 23/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Income Tax Act 2007 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the applicant was not entitled to a tax credit against income tax liability for tax spared by China under New Zealand’ s Controlled Foreign Company tax regime.
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
20 June 2018
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500.
20 June 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Rajendra Prasad v Indiana Publications (NZ) Limited, Arin Lal, Venkat Ram and Mahesh Parera
Case number
SC 24/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in striking out the applicant’s claim for breach of copyright – Whether the Supreme Court should recall its decision to dismiss the application for leave to appeal.
Result
A The applications for recall and for an extension of time for leave to appeal are dismissed.
B There is no award of costs.
21 May 2018
B There is no award of costs.
21 May 2018
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Recall judgment
Case name
Rajendra Prasad v Indiana Publications (NZ) Limited
Case number
SC 25/2018
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in striking out the applicant’s claim for breach of copyright – Whether the Supreme Court should recall its decision to dismiss the application for leave to appeal.
Result
A The applications for recall and for an extension of time for leave to appeal are dismissed.
B There is no award of costs.
21 May 2018
B There is no award of costs.
21 May 2018
High Court decision
Recall judgment
Page 49 of 110