31 July 2019
MEDIA RELEASE – FOR IMMEDIATE PUBLICATION
PETER HUGH McGREGOR ELLIS v THE QUEEN
(SC 49/2019)  NZSC 83
This summary is provided to assist in the understanding of the Court’s judgment. It does not comprise part of the
reasons for that judgment. The full judgment with reasons is the only authoritative document. The full text of the
judgment and reasons can be found at Judicial Decisions of Public Interest www.courtsofnz.govt.nz
Please note that the publication of the names or identifying particulars of the complainants and child witnesses under
the age of 17 is prohibited by ss 139 and 139A of the Criminal Justice Act 1985.
Mr Ellis was convicted on 16 charges of sexual offending against seven children in 1993. The complainants attended the
Christchurch Civic Childcare Centre where Mr Ellis was employed.
Mr Ellis appealed twice to the Court of Appeal, the second time after a referral by the Governor-General. The first
appeal quashed three of the convictions. The second appeal against the remaining 13 convictions was dismissed in 1999.
Mr Ellis applied to the Supreme Court for leave to appeal against his convictions in June 2019. Mr Ellis also applied
for an extension of time to make the application for leave to appeal.
The Crown opposed both applications.
The Court’s approach
In this case, before determining whether to grant leave to appeal, the Supreme Court had first to consider whether Mr
Ellis should be permitted to bring the application given the length of time that has passed since his second appeal was
In its judgment, the Court noted the touchstone in deciding whether to grant an extension will always be the interests
of justice. Other factors the Court may have regard to include the seriousness of the charges, the strength of the
proposed appeal, the impact on others and prejudice to the Crown. Also relevant is whether fresh evidence has come to
The Court’s decisions
Application for extension of time
The Supreme Court considered that, despite the delay, the interests of justice require that the application for an
extension of time be granted so that the issues can be fully aired on appeal.
The Supreme Court granted Mr Ellis’ application for leave to appeal. In accordance with its usual practice, the Court
did not give reasons for granting leave to appeal. This is because leave is decided at a preliminary stage and full
arguments are dealt with on appeal. There may also be further evidence called by the Crown at the appeal hearing.
The Court instructed the Registrar to arrange a telephone conference to canvass arrangements for the hearing of the
(a) whether Mr Ellis will apply for leave to adduce further evidence (apart from the affidavits already filed);
(b) whether the Crown objects to the admission at the appeal hearing of the affidavits filed in support of the
application for leave to appeal;
(c) the approximate timeframe for the Crown to file its evidence in reply;
(d) a timetable for filing submissions; and
(e) the likely duration and timing of the appeal hearing.
[Scoop copy of full decision: 2019NZSC83_EllisvR_Leave.pdf