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.
14 May 2024
Case information summary 2024 (as at 14 May 2024) – Cases where leave granted (121 KB)
Case information summary 2024 (as at 14 May 2024) – Cases where leave to appeal decision not yet made (PDF, 92 KB)
All years
Case name
X v W and The Queen
Case number
SC 80/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in determining that it had no jurisdiction to appoint independent counsel to represent the applicant in criminal proceedings in respect of which he is the complainant.CA731/2015
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
16 August 2016
16 August 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Not publicly available
Case name
Alistair Stuart Lyon v The Queen
Case number
SC 81/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Conviction Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its analysis of trial counsel competence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its approach to the evidence. [2016] NZCA 293 CA746/2014
Result
The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
29 September 2016
29 September 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Bodie Hoani Ngapaki Stewart v The Queen
Case number
SC 82/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Juries Act 1981, s 22– Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its conclusion that the trial Judge was not wrong to discharge the second juror. [2016] NZCA 217 CA27/2016
Result
A The application for an extension of time to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 October 2016
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 October 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Narayan Prasad v The Queen
Case number
SC 83/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Appeal against conviction – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that deficiencies in reliability warning did not lead to a miscarriage of justice – Whether Court of Appeal erred in finding no deficiencies in directions on previous acquittal evidence. [2016] NZCA 163 CA695/2014
Result
A An extension of time to apply for leave to appeal is granted.
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 November 2016
B The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
3 November 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
NARAYAN PRASAD v R [2016] NZSC 146 3 November 2016 (PDF, 83 KB)
High Court decision
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Green Growth No. 2 Limited v Queen Elizabeth The Second National Trust
Case number
SC 84/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent was entitled to rectification of the covenant – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the covenant was not invalid – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in holding that the respondent’s notification of the covenant was not wrongful in terms of s 81 of the Land Transfer Act 1952. [2016] NZCA 308 CA47/2015
Result
A The appeal is allowed to the extent only that the order for rectification is set aside.
B There is a declaration that for the purposes of cls 2 and 7 of the second schedule of the open space covenant references to “protected area” mean the whole block of land subject to the covenant.
C The appellant is to pay the respondent costs of $25,000 and usual disbursements.
17 August 2018
_______________________
A The application for partial recall of this Court’s judgment of 17 August 2018 (Green Growth No 2 Ltd v Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust [2018] NZSC 75) is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
26 November 2018
B There is a declaration that for the purposes of cls 2 and 7 of the second schedule of the open space covenant references to “protected area” mean the whole block of land subject to the covenant.
C The appellant is to pay the respondent costs of $25,000 and usual disbursements.
17 August 2018
_______________________
A The application for partial recall of this Court’s judgment of 17 August 2018 (Green Growth No 2 Ltd v Queen Elizabeth the Second National Trust [2018] NZSC 75) is dismissed.
B There is no order for costs.
26 November 2018
Transcripts
- Hearing date 13 February 2018 (PDF, 547 KB)
Media Releases
- MR [2018] NZSC 75 (PDF, 68 KB)
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Recall judgment
Case name
D v Immigration and Protection Tribunal New Zealand and Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
Case number
SC 85/2016
Summary
Civil appeal – Immigration Act 2009, s 249 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of s 249. [2016] NZCA 320 CA642/2015
Result
A notice of abandonment having been lodged, the appeal is deemed to be dismissed.
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Shivneel Shahil Kumar v The Queen
Case number
SC 86/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of the “one transaction” rule from Thabo Meli v R [1954] 1 WLR 228 (PC) – Whether the trial judge incorrectly directed the jury on the issue of withdrawal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicants’ appeals against sentence. [2016] NZCA 329 CA264/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed.
7 November 2016
7 November 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Bryne Permal v The Queen
Case number
SC 87/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in its interpretation and application of the “one transaction” rule from Thabo Meli v R [1954] 1 WLR 228 (PC) – Whether the trial judge incorrectly directed the jury on the issue of withdrawal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the applicants’ appeals against sentence. [2016] NZCA 329 CA310/2015
Result
The applications for leave to appeal are dismissed. 7 November 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
Judgment appealed from
Case name
Yao Wei He v Zhixiong Chen
Case number
SC 88/2016
Summary
Civil Appeal – Court of Appeal (Civil) Rules 2005 – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in refusing to grant an application for leave to adduce further evidence – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in dismissing the appeal of the decision of the High Court. [2016] NZCA 340 CA435/2015
Result
A The application for leave to appeal and the application to adduce further evidence are dismissed.
B Costs of $7,500 are payable to the respondent.
21 November 2016
B Costs of $7,500 are payable to the respondent.
21 November 2016
Leave judgment - leave dismissed
High Court decision
Judgment appealed from
Case name
PricewaterhouseCoopers v Robert Bruce Walker and Ors
Case number
SC 89/2016
Summary
Criminal Appeal – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not finding an assignment of debt and security impermissible – Whether Court of Appeal erred in not finding proceedings to be an abuse of process.[2016] NZCA 338 CA475/2015
Result
A Leave to appeal is granted (PricewaterhouseCoopers v Walker [2016] NZCA 338)
B The approved question is: Did the Court of Appeal err in upholding the High Court’s refusal to stay the proceeding?
13 December 2016
_____________________________
A Leave is granted to the respondents and the intervener to adduce new evidence.
B The appeal is dismissed.
C We make no award of costs.
6 October 2017
B The approved question is: Did the Court of Appeal err in upholding the High Court’s refusal to stay the proceeding?
13 December 2016
_____________________________
A Leave is granted to the respondents and the intervener to adduce new evidence.
B The appeal is dismissed.
C We make no award of costs.
6 October 2017
Transcripts
- Hearing date 16 March 2017 (PDF, 360 KB)
Media Releases
- pwmr (PDF, 272 KB)
High Court decision
Court of Appeal decision
Leave judgment - leave granted
Substantive judgment
Page 106 of 243