Pinpoint · Judgment search

REGINA v DUONG

[1999] NSWCCA 353 ; (1999) 109 A Crim R 60

NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · 17 September 1999 · Official judgment

Cited by 5 indexed judgments

All Cited 5

2002: 1 citing judgment 2005: 1 citing judgment 2012: 1 citing judgment 2016: 1 citing judgment 2018: 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. REGINA v GIOVANNONE [2002] NSWCCA 323 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 7× · judgment
  2. Harrigan v Regina [2005] NSWCCA 449 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 12× · judgment
  3. Independent Commission Against Corruption v Karkowski [2012] NSWLC 6 Cited Local Court of NSW · cited 1× · judgment
  4. R v ARAYA [2016] NSWDC 430 Cited District Court of NSW · judgment
  5. Rodgers v R [2018] NSWCCA 47 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 6× · 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 (6)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Griffiths v The Queen [1977] HCA 44 Cited cited 233×
  2. Attorney-General v Tichy (1982) 30 SASR 84 Cited cited 67×
  3. (1987-88) 104 CLR 465 Cited
  4. Ibbs v The Queen (1991) 163 CLR 447 Cited cited 2×
  5. R v Pangallo (1991) 56 A Crim R 441 Cited cited 23×
  6. R v Taouk (1992) 65 A Crim R 387 Cited cited 63×
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.