Pinpoint · Judgment search

Indatissa v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs

[2000] FCA 1119

Federal Court of Australia · 10 August 2000 · Official judgment

Cited by 8 indexed judgments

All Applied or followed 3 Cited 5

2000: 1 citing judgment 2001: 7 citing judgments 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. Mariathasian v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1636 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  2. Choi v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 6 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  3. Debnath v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 27 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 2× · judgment
  4. Al-Miahi, in the matter of an application for Writs of Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus and an Injunction against Ruddock [2001] FCA 128 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  5. Yulianti v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 142 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 16× · judgment
  6. Ahmed v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 591 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  7. Shatku & Anor v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 636 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  8. Chhour v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 911 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 11× · 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 (17)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Akers v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1988) 20 FCR 363 Cited cited 36×
  2. Luu v Renevier [1989] FCA 518 Distinguished cited 156×
  3. March v E & MH Stramare Pty Ltd [1991] HCA 12 Cited cited 721×
  4. Royall v The Queen [1991] HCA 27 Cited cited 140×
  5. Curragh Queensland Mining Ltd v Daniel (1992) 34 FCR 212 Applied or followed cited 185×
  6. Singh, Inderjit v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1366 Cited cited 5×
  7. Tji, Lay Kon v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs [1998] FCA 1380 Cited cited 9×
  8. Macedonian Teachers Association of Victoria Inc v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission & Anor [1998] FCA 1650 Cited cited 39×
  9. State of Victoria v Macedonian Teachers Association of Victoria [1999] FCA 1287 Cited cited 23×
  10. Chopra v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 480 Distinguished cited 13×
  11. Yilan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 854 Cited cited 25×
  12. Fernando v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1999] FCA 962 Distinguished cited 15×
  13. Guden v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 236 Applied or followed cited 22×
  14. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Singh [2000] FCA 845 Cited cited 231×
  15. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Li Yue [2000] FCA 856 Distinguished cited 14×
  16. Charaev v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 865 Cited cited 5×
  17. N258/00A v MIMA [2000] FCA 993 Cited cited 12×
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.