Former Court of Appeal and Supreme Court Judge Bill Wilson KC has recently died (12 September 2025), a sad event to those who knew him. Surprisingly, this has gone virtually unheralded (The Press being the only report). This note is intended to redress that omission.
Bill’s career as a practicing lawyer was a distinguished one. Following his graduation (LL.B and LL.M (Hons)) from Victoria University, he practised for many years at Bell Gully becoming a partner in 1971. While there, he served as a member of the Waitangi Tribunal for 9 years. In 1996 he left the firm to go to the Independent Bar and immediately took Silk. As such, he had an extensive and busy practice, including appearing in the Privy Council before the New Zealand Supreme Court was established in 2004. Two significant cases in which he appeared for parties on the same side and having the same interest as my clients were, first, a case brought by the Commerce Commission against Fletcher Challenge, Brierley Investments and other parties arising from the sale of Winstone. Secondly, he appeared in the Privy Council to support my client Raylee Harley who (successfully) appealed decisions of the New Zealand courts ordering her to pay costs for alleged incompetence in acting for a difficult client, a finding rejected by the Privy Council. Bill’s manner in Court can best be described as quietly persuasive, a feature respected by the Judges who he appeared before.
Working with him was much appreciated by younger lawyers who Bill encouraged and set an example to.
He was appointed to the Bench in 2007, directly to the Court of Appeal, skipping the normal route through the High Court. However, he voluntarily sat as a High Court Judge on a major criminal trial for the experience. In less than a year, he was promoted from the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court when Sir Kenneth Keith retired.
His tenure on the Supreme Court was marked with controversy arising from a case (Saxmere and the NZ Wool Board) that he had sat on in the Court of Appeal. One of the counsel in that case was a QC with whom Bill was a partner in a horse breeding business. Although he disclosed that fact to the opposing counsel, he did so by telephone rather than by formal disclosure by way of a Court Minute. Although Saxmere were advised of the connection between Bill and counsel for the Wool Board, when Judgment was given against it by the Court of Appeal, it applied to the Supreme Court for a rehearing, which was granted. An unsatisfactory feature of the Supreme Court’s decision was a finding that, because of a temporary imbalance in the partnership accounts against Bill, he was “beholden” to his lawyer partner, a finding which did not square with the history of their dealings with each other.
Complaints were also made to the Judicial Conduct Commissioner who recommended that a Judicial Conduct Panel be established to investigate the allegations. Bill challenged that decision in the High Court by way of judicial review. The matter was heard by a Full Court which ruled against him. Bill then took the step of resigning, taking the honourable view that no matter what the outcome of a Judicial Conduct Panel, his position on the Supreme Court would become untenable and damaging to the Court.
Many, if not most, lawyers felt that the whole saga had been badly handled and that he should have been exonerated.
Returning to the Bar, Bill acted as an arbitrator and also participated in a litigation funder which assisted in the conduct of class actions. He also chaired an inquiry into domestic violence which proposed a Domestic Violence Court, a new agency to implement a long- term national family violence strategy and a centralized database to manage high risk cases.
Regrettably, his health deteriorated leading ultimately to his premature passing.
While the Saxmere case has coloured his career, his ability, the warmth of his personality and the help that he willingly extended to those in need will constitute the memories that those who knew him will retain.
Jim Farmer KC
23 October 2025