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.
20 March 2026
Case information summary 2025 (as at 20 March 2026) – Cases where leave granted (PDF, 88 KB)
Case information summary 2025 (as at 20 March 2026) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 123 KB)
All years
Case name
NR v M and others
Case number
SC 125/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether there were a number of material errors in the Court of Appeal’s hearing and judgment[2014] NZCA 526 CA 144/2014
Result
The application to file further submissions is declined. The interlocutory application of 1 December 2014 is dismissed.
Costs of $2,500 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M.
19 December 2014
______________
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014).
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Costs of $2,500 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M.
19 December 2014
______________
A The applications for leave to appeal in SC 77/2014, SC 120/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 are dismissed.
B The application for recall of this Court’s judgment dated 19 December 2014 ([2014] NZSC 189) is dismissed.
C The other interlocutory applications of 12 January 2015 are dismissed.
D Costs of $10,000 are to be paid by the applicant to Ms M (as first respondent in SC 77/2014, SC 125/2014 and SC 3/2015 and second respondent in SC 120/2014).
E Costs of $2,500 are awarded to the Second, Third and Fourth Respondents in SC 77/2014 and SC 125/2014.
27 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
N v M [2014] NZSC 189 [19 December 2014] (PDF, 95 KB)
Substantive judgment
N v M [2015] NZSC 15 [27 February 20 (PDF, 164 KB)
Case name
Robert Clifford Hoani Cribb v Evia Rural Finance Limited and The Official Assignee
Case number
SC 126/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal decision had a sound factual basis – Whether the Court of Appeal decision failed to consider the appellant’s argument – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to admit the further evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding the appellant to be insolvent – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in supporting the exercise of the discretion by the Associate Judge.[2014] NZCA 543 CA 179/2012
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed. 18 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Terranova Homes & Care Limited v Service and Food Workers Union Nga Ringa Tota Incorporated and Kristine Bartlett
Case number
SC 127/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Equal Pay Act 1972 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation of s 3(1)(b) of the Equal Pay Act 1972. [2014] NZCA 516 CA 631/2013
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. No order as to costs.
22 December 2014
22 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Case name
Ian Russell Geary v Accident Compensation Corporation
Case number
SC 128/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal fulfilled the role of an appeal court – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the High Court Rules endorse the practice of a Judge hearing an application for leave to appeal against his or her own decision.[2014] NZCA 534 CA 472/2014
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
23 February 2015
B The applicant must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
23 February 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Issac John Chadderton v The Queen
Case number
SC 129/2014
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Birchler v Police [2010] NZSC 109, [2011] 1 NZLR 169 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by failing to follow the Supreme Court’s decision in Birchler v Police – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that the two detentions were lawful.[2014] NZCA 528 CA 40/2014
Result
The application for deferral of the operation of the disqualification order is dismissed.
8 December 2014
______________
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
31 March 2015
8 December 2014
______________
Application for leave to appeal dismissed.
31 March 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Additional document
Case name
Vincent Ross Siemer v Clare O’Brien and Attorney-General
Case number
SC 130/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the High Court erred in granting the Attorney -General standing to be heard where the proceedings had previously been stayed against the Attorney-General. [2014] NZHC 2886 CIV 2013 485 5611
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
25 February 2015
___________
Application for recall dismissed.
10 March 2015
___________
Second application for recall dismissed.
5 June 2015
_____________
Judgment reissued.
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the second respondent costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
5 June 2015
______________
Third application for recall dismissed.
23 June 2015
B The applicant must pay the respondents costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
25 February 2015
___________
Application for recall dismissed.
10 March 2015
___________
Second application for recall dismissed.
5 June 2015
_____________
Judgment reissued.
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicant must pay the second respondent costs of $2,500, plus reasonable disbursements.
5 June 2015
______________
Third application for recall dismissed.
23 June 2015
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Recall judgment
Recall judgment
Case name
M v The Queen
Case number
SC 131/2014
Summary
Pre-trial ruling[2014] NZCA 576 CA 601/2014
Result
Application for leave to appeal dismissed. 11 December 2014
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Not publicly available
Judgment appealed from
[2014] NZCA 576 -not available online
Case name
Philippa Currie, Raymond Donnelly & Co, The Crown Solicitor at Christchurch, The Attoney-General of New Zealand and others v Vincent James Clayton and Linda Joyce Westbury
Case number
SC 132/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that an accused may be entitled to damages for misfeasance in public office where disclosure by a prosecutor is deliberately misleading – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding the prosecutor’s disclosure of the District Court’s sentencing indication had a “requisite public character” and that it was an exercise of a “power or authority”.[2014] NZCA 511 CA 341/2013
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay the respondents reasonable disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar). 5 March 2015
B The applicants must pay the respondents reasonable disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar). 5 March 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Dennis Joseph Gardiner and Hutia Monica Gardiner v Westpac New Zealand Limited
Case number
SC 133/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the mortgagee sale was substantially below the statutory and common law criteria of best price – Whether the sale was arguably unlawful being made to Westpac’s real estate agent’ s licensed salesperson responsible for selling the property – Whether the proceeds of the two mortgagee sales arguably fully repaid the loan but guarantee quantum issues were not summarily determined nor capable of being properly determined on appeal. [2014] NZCA 537 CA 264/2013
Result
A The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
B The applicants must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
9 March 2015
B The applicants must pay the respondent costs of $2,500 together with disbursements (to be fixed if necessary by the Registrar).
9 March 2015
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
John Douglas Tamati Te Hoko-Whitu-Atu Hauraki as trustee of the Ngawapurua and Rua Roa Trusts v Richard Tatere
Case number
SC 134/2014
Summary
Civil Appeal – Maori land – Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in treating the trustees’ children as if they were income beneficiaries when there was irrefutable evidence that eight of the nine children had ceased to be and were not income beneficiaries for the purposes of the Act – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by ignoring the only condition of the consents of both sets of beneficiaries, that due and proper consideration be given to the claims relating to “tipuna whenua” , “whakapapa” and “taonga tuku iho” – Whether the Court of Appeal erred by declining to consider whakapapa which it had provisionally allowed to be adduced.[2014] NZCA 532 CA 451/2013
Result
Notice of abandonment being filed, the application for leave to appeal is deemed to be dismissed. 20 February 2015
Judgment appealed from
Page 172 of 274