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
George Tama Nicholls v Mark Steven Nicholls, Airini Pirihiria Tukerangi, Delace William James, Kahutoroa Mataia Tukerangi, Viv Tama Nicholls, Anita Mari Norman and Sarah Jane Nicholls as trustees of the Ahu Whenua Trust known as The W T Nicholls Trust
Case number
SC 76/2020
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order as to costs.
19 February 2021
B There is no order as to costs.
19 February 2021
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
W v S, H L and L
Case number
SC 91/2020
Summary
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 rmetrial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
Result
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 rmetrial. Publication in law report or law digest permitted. 26 November 2020
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Case name
David Noel Roigard v The Queen
Case number
SC 25/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in relation to evidential matters (namely jury directions and prejudice in relation to cellmate confession evidence) – Whether the Court of Appeal wrongly determined aggravating factors in determining a minimum period of imprisonment.
Result
A Leave to appeal against conviction is granted to the extent described below (Roigard v R [2019] NZCA 8).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the admissibility of the proposed evidence of the witnesses F and W.
C Leave to appeal against sentence is declined.
27 June 2019
__________________________________________________
The appeal is dismissed.
14 September 2020
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal erred in upholding the admissibility of the proposed evidence of the witnesses F and W.
C Leave to appeal against sentence is declined.
27 June 2019
__________________________________________________
The appeal is dismissed.
14 September 2020
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 94 (PDF, 76 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
DAVID NOEL ROIGARD v R [2019] NZSC 63 [27 June 2019] (PDF, 232 KB)
Substantive judgment
Hearing - Judges
3 October 2019
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France, and Williams JJ
Case synopsis
Case name
W (SC38/2019) v The Queen
Case number
SC 38/2019
Summary
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.
Result
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.
14 September 2020
14 September 2020
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
High/District Court judgment
Not Publicly Available
Hearing date - Judges
19 August 2019
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Case name
The Queen v W (SC39/2019) and H (SC39/2019)
Case number
SC 39/2019
Summary
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.
Result
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.
14 September 2020
14 September 2020
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Hearing date - Judges
19 August 2019
Winkelmann CJ, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Case name
Quentin Woods v New Zealand Police
Case number
SC 115/2019
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Sentencing – Special conditions – Residential restrictions – Intensive monitoring – Sentencing Act 2002, s 93(2B) – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that s 93(2B) of the Sentencing Act permits imposition of conditions similar to residential restrictions and intensive monitoring – Whether the Court erred in holding that the special conditions imposed on the appellant did not amount to residential restrictions or intensive monitoring.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (Woods v New Zealand Police [2019] NZCA 446).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicant’s appeals.
13 February 2020
________________________________
The appeal is allowed.
10 December 2020
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to dismiss the applicant’s appeals.
13 February 2020
________________________________
The appeal is allowed.
10 December 2020
Date of hearing
21 May 2020
Judges
Winkelmann CJ, William Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan and Arnold JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 21 May 2020 (PDF, 399 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2020] NZSC 141 (PDF, 190 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Case name
Lambie Trustee Limited v Prudence Anne Addleman
Case number
SC 118/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal.
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted on whether the Court of Appeal was correct to order the applicant to disclose to the respondent any legal opinions and other advice obtained by the trustees of the Lambie Trust and funded by the Trust (Addleman v Lambie Trustee Ltd [2019] NZCA 480, (2019) 5 NZTR 29-016).
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to reject the applicant’s claims of legal advice privilege and litigation privilege respectively.
C In all other respects, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
4 March 2020
______________________
A With the clarification that the orders for disclosure made by the Court of Appeal do not extend to legal advice given from June 2015 in connection with this litigation and with leave reserved to Lambie Trustee Ltd to revert to this Court in relation to advice received after 7 November 2014 and before June 2015, the appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
1 June 2021
__________________________________
A Mrs Addleman is to receive out of the Lambie Trust her actual costs in relation to the appeal to this Court plus usual disbursements (to be fixed by the Registrar if necessary). We allow for second counsel. Mrs Addleman is to provide a schedule of the costs incurred to Lambie Trustee Ltd within 10 working days of the date of delivery of this judgment. Any issue as to the reasonableness of the costs sought is to be determined by the Registrar.
B Lambie Trustee Ltd is not entitled to any indemnity for costs and expenses in connection with the appeal to this Court, including both its own legal fees and any solicitor client costs and disbursements due to Mrs Addleman.
C Lambie Trustee Ltd is to reimburse the Lambie Trust (from funds not sourced from the Trust) the costs awarded by this Court on the appeal.
D The orders of this Court at B and C, above, apply to the award of costs in the Court of Appeal.
E Mrs Addleman is entitled to costs on a 2B basis together with reasonable disbursements in relation to costs in the High Court. Orders B and C, above, apply to the award of costs in that Court.
17 February 2023
B The approved question is whether the Court of Appeal was correct to reject the applicant’s claims of legal advice privilege and litigation privilege respectively.
C In all other respects, the application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
4 March 2020
______________________
A With the clarification that the orders for disclosure made by the Court of Appeal do not extend to legal advice given from June 2015 in connection with this litigation and with leave reserved to Lambie Trustee Ltd to revert to this Court in relation to advice received after 7 November 2014 and before June 2015, the appeal is dismissed.
B Costs are reserved.
1 June 2021
__________________________________
A Mrs Addleman is to receive out of the Lambie Trust her actual costs in relation to the appeal to this Court plus usual disbursements (to be fixed by the Registrar if necessary). We allow for second counsel. Mrs Addleman is to provide a schedule of the costs incurred to Lambie Trustee Ltd within 10 working days of the date of delivery of this judgment. Any issue as to the reasonableness of the costs sought is to be determined by the Registrar.
B Lambie Trustee Ltd is not entitled to any indemnity for costs and expenses in connection with the appeal to this Court, including both its own legal fees and any solicitor client costs and disbursements due to Mrs Addleman.
C Lambie Trustee Ltd is to reimburse the Lambie Trust (from funds not sourced from the Trust) the costs awarded by this Court on the appeal.
D The orders of this Court at B and C, above, apply to the award of costs in the Court of Appeal.
E Mrs Addleman is entitled to costs on a 2B basis together with reasonable disbursements in relation to costs in the High Court. Orders B and C, above, apply to the award of costs in that Court.
17 February 2023
Date of hearing
02 December 2020
Judges
William Young, Glazebrook, O'Regan, Ellen France and Williams JJ
Transcripts
- Hearing date 2 December 2020 (PDF, 492 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2021] NZSC 54 (PDF, 401 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Supreme court decision
Summary
Case name
P(SC 120/2019) V Commissioner of Inland Revenue, W(SC 120/2019) and Attorney-General
Case number
SC 120/2019
Summary
Civil Appeal - Application for leave to bring an appeal
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B There is no order as to costs.
C We make an order prohibiting publication of the name or identifying particulars of P, W and A.
18 March 2020
_______________________________
A The application to review the decision of the Deputy Registrar is dismissed.
B The application for recall of our judgment of 18 March 2020 (P (SC 120/2019) v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2020] NZSC 22) is dismissed.
20 May 2020
B There is no order as to costs.
C We make an order prohibiting publication of the name or identifying particulars of P, W and A.
18 March 2020
_______________________________
A The application to review the decision of the Deputy Registrar is dismissed.
B The application for recall of our judgment of 18 March 2020 (P (SC 120/2019) v Commissioner of Inland Revenue [2020] NZSC 22) is dismissed.
20 May 2020
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Case name
W v The Queen
Case number
SC 16/2018
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether trial counsel’s failure to follow applicant’s instructions was grounds for a mistrial – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal against conviction.
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
14 May 2018
14 May 2018
High Court decision
Not publicly available
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
W (SC 16/2018) v R [2018] NZSC 46 [14 May 2018] (PDF, 203 KB)
Case name
W v The Queen
Case number
SC 119/2018
Summary
Order prohibiting publication of the judgment or any part of the proceedings (including the result) in the news media or on the internet or other publicly available database until final disposition of the trial. Publication in a law report or law digest permitted.
Result
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 remains in force. Publication in law report or law digest permitted.
11 March 2019
Court of Appeal decision
Not publicly available
Page 3 of 6