This is the answer OP. Also have a look at the Clyde Dam cases from Cooke J - memory’s getting fuzzy but the court interpreted the laws very widely and basically created case-made law which was quite far extended from the original law, until the Government legislated to bring it back into line. Maybe someone can chime in with the details. This is the common law working as it should, by the way. So I’d talk about how cases decided by the High Court have often extended the law and prompted Parliament to consider how they really want it to work.

My fun fact: for quite a while hacking was a crime in NZ because it was theft of electricity :) the case law extended the existing law to cover it well before parliament got around to legislating on it. I’m not sure if it’s relevant to your paper though.

In case you hadn’t realised: the Supreme Court was only created in 2003, which is very recent in legal terms. The High Court has made most of our major decisions, with some rare cases going from there to the Privy Council in the UK.