Pinpoint · Judgment search

Tesfamichael v Minister for Immigration & multicultural Affairs

[1999] FCA 1661

Federal Court of Australia · 2 December 1999 · Official judgment

Cited by 0 indexed judgments

No indexed judgment cites this case yet.

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.

Authorities cited (14)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Chan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs [1989] HCA 62 Cited cited 873×
  2. Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond [1990] HCA 33 Cited cited 2,077×
  3. Curragh Queensland Mining Ltd v Daniel (1992) 34 FCR 212 Applied or followed cited 185×
  4. Muralidharan v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 62 FCR 602 Applied or followed cited 2×
  5. Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Minister for v Wu Shan Liang [1996] HCA 6 Applied or followed cited 2,712×
  6. Ratnayake, Palitha v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1997] FCA 482 Applied or followed cited 4×
  7. Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Guo Wei Rong [1997] HCA 22 Applied or followed cited 776×
  8. Singh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1126 Applied or followed cited 11×
  9. Singh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1234 Applied or followed cited 8×
  10. Yue v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1404 Applied or followed cited 3×
  11. Thevendram v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 182 Applied or followed cited 43×
  12. Borsa v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 348 Applied or followed cited 7×
  13. Han v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 376 Applied or followed cited 3×
  14. Ahmed v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 811 Applied or followed cited 22×
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.