But that court in February last year decided that Mobil was not contractually obliged to decontaminate the subsurface of the land.
Waterfront Auckland - now called Panuku Development Auckland - then challenged the decision and the Court of Appeal reversed it, awarding a $10 million judgment to the council-controlled organisation.
The Supreme Court, in a just released decision, has now agreed to take the case.
The argument will focus on whether "clean and tidy" clauses in the leases require Mobil to fix any hydrocarbon contamination of the leased land on termination of these agreements and, if no, is the oil giant liable for fixing any contamination on the basis of an implied term in the lease.
The parties will also argue about, if there was a requirement to clean up, whether that obligation relates only to hydrocarbon contamination caused since 1985 or does it extend to contamination caused to the land since 1925.