Pinpoint · Judgment search

T v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs

[1999] FCA 878

Federal Court of Australia · 30 June 1999 · Official judgment

Cited by 7 indexed judgments

All Doubted 1 Applied or followed 1 Cited 5

1999: 3 citing judgments, 1 negative 2000: 4 citing judgments 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. Yue v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1404 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · judgment
  2. O v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1405 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  3. Direse v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 1626 Doubted Federal Court of Australia · cited 4× · judgment
  4. Nefiodova v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 179 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 5× · judgment
  5. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Li Yue [2000] FCA 856 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 14× · judgment
  6. Charaev v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 865 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 5× · judgment
  7. Sarrazola v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs (No 3) [2000] FCA 919 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · 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 (20)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Television Capricornia Pty Ltd v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (1986) 13 FCR 511 Cited cited 26×
  2. Akers v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1988) 20 FCR 363 Cited cited 36×
  3. Luu v Renevier [1989] FCA 518 Distinguished cited 156×
  4. Curragh Queensland Mining Ltd v Daniel (1992) 34 FCR 212 Applied or followed cited 185×
  5. Re Feliciano v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1996) 43 ALD 1 Cited cited 7×
  6. Durairajasingham v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1997) 50 ALD 469 Cited cited 6×
  7. Sun v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1997) 81 FCR 71 Distinguished cited 142×
  8. Bilgin, Ibrahim v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Afffairs [1997] FCA 1022 Cited cited 41×
  9. Abdalla v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 51 ALD 11 Cited cited 23×
  10. Tji, Lay Kon v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs [1998] FCA 1380 Cited cited 9×
  11. Ngo Quang Thuat v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1489 Cited cited 3×
  12. Choi, Pat Tai v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1556 Applied or followed cited 9×
  13. Kathiresan, Sivaganeshan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 159 Cited cited 3×
  14. Ferati, Besim v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1709 Cited
  15. Rangin, Saeed v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 369 Cited
  16. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Epeabaka [1999] FCA 1 Cited cited 69×
  17. Tuli v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 271 Cited cited 8×
  18. Chen v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 34 Cited cited 23×
  19. Sundararaj v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 692 Cited cited 5×
  20. 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.