Pinpoint · Judgment search

R v Wong and Ng

(1988) 39 A Crim R 1

1988 · Find the judgment

Cited by 11 indexed judgments

All Cited 11

1999: 2 citing judgments 2002: 1 citing judgment 2004: 2 citing judgments 2005: 2 citing judgments 2006: 2 citing judgments 2008: 1 citing judgment 2009: 1 citing judgment 1988 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
citing judgments per year of which distinguished, doubted, not followed or overruled · line marks the decision

Sort: Oldest first Newest first Most cited

  1. REGINA v SPITERI [1999] NSWCCA 3 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 20× · judgment
  2. R v Blanco [1999] NSWCCA 121 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 82× · judgment
  3. Regina v X, Regina v Y [2002] NSWCCA 40 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 3× · judgment
  4. Regina v Mas Rivadavia; Regina v El Akkaoui; Regina v Aksu [2004] NSWCCA 284 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 33× · judgment
  5. Regina v Bezan [2004] NSWCCA 342 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 17× · judgment
  6. R v HARMOUCHE [2005] NSWCCA 398 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 42× · judgment
  7. Kardoulias and Andres v Regina [2005] NSWCCA 456 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 14× · judgment
  8. REGINA v. SMITH [2006] NSWCCA 129 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 2× · judgment
  9. REGINA v. BCC [2006] NSWCCA 130 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 3× · judgment
  10. R v SC [2008] NSWCCA 29 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 16× · judgment
  11. Hosseini v R [2009] NSWCCA 52 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 4× · judgment

Tree of authority

Built upon

Later cases citing this one, in order of decision, and the cases citing them in turn. The most cited are shown at each level.

This judgment is not in the index, so the authorities it cites are not known here. It is shown because indexed judgments cite it.

How the citator works

Citations are read from the text of each indexed judgment. A report citation written alongside a neutral citation, such as [2008] HCA 9; (2008) 234 CLR 50, teaches the citator that both name the same case, so later citations by either are counted together.

Treatment is read from the words in the sentence that cites the case: overruled or disapproved; not followed or declined to follow; distinguished or distinguishable; doubted; applied, followed or adopted. Anything else is cited. It is a guide to which judgments to read, not a judicial history: a judgment that discusses a case at length without one of those words is shown as citing it, and one mentioning several cases in a sentence may attach the word to all of them.

Only judgments in this index are counted, mostly the High Court, the Federal Court and New South Wales courts and tribunals since 2006. Earlier cases appear as authorities but their own authorities are unknown, so a tree ends there. Check a treatment by reading the passage before relying on it.

Judgment text is from the Open Australian Legal Corpus (Isaacus, CC BY 4.0) and the courts’ own websites. Each judgment links to its official version: read it before relying on anything here.