Pinpoint · Judgment search

Holland v Commissioner of Taxation

[1999] FCA 1125

Federal Court of Australia · 13 July 1999 · Official judgment

Cited by 2 indexed judgments

All Cited 2

2020: 1 citing judgment 2022: 1 citing judgment 1999 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. Chen v Secretary, Department of Social Services (No 2) [2020] FCA 384 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  2. Logic Accountants & Tax Professionals Pty Ltd v Tax Practitioners Board [2022] FCA 830 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment

Tree of authority

Built on

The authorities this case relies on, earliest first, and the authorities those relied on. Open a branch to go further back.

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.

Authorities cited (9)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Edwards (Inspector of Taxes) v Bairstow [1955] UKHL 3 Cited cited 46×
  2. Lombardo v Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) (1979) 40 FLR 208 Cited cited 35×
  3. Blackwood Hodge (Australia) Pty Ltd v Collector of Customs (NSW) [1980] FCA 117 Cited cited 35×
  4. Puhlhofer v Hillingdon London Borough Council [1986] UKHL 1 Cited cited 46×
  5. Broadbridge v Stammers (1987) 16 FCR 296 Cited cited 22×
  6. Australian Conservation Foundation v Forestry Commission (1988) 19 FCR 127 Cited cited 28×
  7. Repatriation Commission v Thompson (1988) 44 FCR 20 Cited cited 7×
  8. Telstra Corporation Ltd v Razmovski (1994) 36 ALD 22 Cited cited 5×
  9. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu [1999] HCA 21 Cited cited 971×
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.