The highest court has allowed them to argue whether the Court of Appeal was correct in its interpretation of the role and obligations of the minister in deciding an application for compulsory acquisition powers.
In particular, the landowners are allowed to litigate whether the minister must be satisfied the proposed taking is fair, sound and reasonably necessary for achieving the objectives of Top Energy or whether it is sufficient that the minister is satisfied the proposed taking is capable of meeting that test.
Under the Resource Management Act, a network operator may apply to the minister to have land required for a project taken under the Public Works Act.
Top Energy refused to comment on the latest development, saying the matter was before the court.
The Environment Court ruled the Act did not contain an explicit requirement that the minister take into account any particular matters when granting the easements but rather their decision was "fully discretionary".
That interpretation was wrong, the High Court ruled.
The Court of Appeal then set aside the High Court ruling and remitted the matter back to the Environment Court to finalise the terms of the easements.
The landowners sought leave from the Supreme Court to challenge the Court of Appeal ruling.
Top Energy earlier said delays in starting the new line has forced the company to spend $12 million over 18 months on 14 back-up diesel generators in Kaitaia, Taipa, Omanaia and Pukenui.
These provided crucial power back-up should the existing Kaikohe to Kaitaia line fail and for regular maintenance work.
The ageing line will reach the end of its life by 2030.