At the time, the creation of the Supreme Court and the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council were controversial constitutional changes in New Zealand.

The inaugural bench (with the exception of the chief justice, who had automatic appointment) were the most senior judges of the New Zealand Court of Appeal at the time.

This practice was broken with the appointment of Justice Bill Wilson in December 2007 after having served less than a year as a judge of the Court of Appeal.

In 1996, Attorney-General Paul East proposed to end the status of the Privy Council as the country's highest court of appeal.

[4] A year later a Ministerial Action Group was formed to assist Ministers in designing the purpose, structure and make-up of a final court of appeal.

The Group's report, Replacing the Privy Council: A New Supreme Court was published in April 2002,[6] before the general election a few months later.

The Monarchist League of New Zealand opposed the abolition of appeals, stating: Most lawyers are opposed to the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council, and doubtless will continue to do so until a more satisfactory justification is given for the abandonment of a tribunal which costs the New Zealand taxpayer nothing, and which gives us access to some of the finest legal minds in the common law world.

Many Maori also see this proposal as a retrograde step, both by removing an impartial tribunal to which they have hitherto been able to appeal, and by cutting another link with the Crown.

[7]Margaret Wilson argued in favour of the bill, stating: When reviewing the legal needs of the community appeals to the Privy Council seemed increasingly anomalous.

The Privy Council itself recognised that some cases it considered were better settled by a New Zealand court and referred back for decision.

Few cases got to the Privy Council because of the costs involved, and because in some areas, such as employment and environment law, the statutes barred such appeals.

Notable supporters of the Supreme Court were former President of the Court of Appeal, Lord of Appeal in Ordinary, and Privy Councillor Lord Cooke of Thorndon and former Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer, while most senior lawyers were opposed to the change.

[4] The Monarchist League complained the majority of members of the select committee were motivated by a "republican agenda".

While the bill was before the select committee, Auckland lawyer Dennis J Gates launched a petition for a non-binding citizens initiated referendum on 3 April 2003, asking the question "Should all rights of appeal to the Privy Council be abolished?".

The reform was supported by National, Labour, the Greens, the Māori Party, ACT and United Future, and was opposed by New Zealand First.

[13] One issue that was particularly contentious as the bill was being debated in Parliament was the appointment of judges to the court, with opposition parties claiming that the Attorney-General would make partisan choices.

[6] The Supreme Court hears many more cases than were heard by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council due to its jurisdiction being considerably broader.

The quality of several Supreme Court judgments have been criticised in New Zealand and overseas, and concerns expressed about the impact on the country's case law and international reputation.