In Banks v R [2017] NZSC 98, the New Zealand Supreme Court declined to grant John Banks leave to appeal against the High Court's decision (upheld in the Court of Appeal) in which the Court declined to grant Mr Banks an award of costs arising from his criminal trial in 2014. 

The appeal concerned Mr Banks' criminal trial of knowingly transmitting a false return of his electoral expenses.  Mr Banks had initially been found guilty in relation to two of Kim Dotcom's donations made through Mr Dotcom's company, Megastuff.  However, Mr Banks' conviction was subsequently quashed as Mr Banks' wife managed to locate two witnesses who essentially provided Mr Banks with an alibi as to when the Crown alleged the offending took place. 

Mr Banks sought costs.  The High Court refused his application - Mr Banks needed to establish that he was not guilty of the offending for which he was first convicted, and the High Court was not satisfied that Mr Banks was innocent.  Mr Banks sought leave to appeal the High Court decision.  The Court of Appeal refused to grant leave.  Mr Banks then appealed to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court considered that there was no point of general or public importance in the appeal, and there appeared to be no miscarriage of justice.  Accordingly, Mr Banks' application for leave to appeal was dismissed.

See the Supreme Court's decision here.