Pinpoint · Judgment search

Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Li

[2000] FCA 1456 ; (2000) 103 FCR 486

Federal Court of Australia · 18 October 2000 · Official judgment

Cited by 35 indexed judgments

All Not followed 1 Distinguished 1 Applied or followed 9 Cited 24

2000: 5 citing judgments 2001: 10 citing judgments 2002: 3 citing judgments, 1 negative 2003: 2 citing judgments 2004: 1 citing judgment 2005: 2 citing judgments 2006: 2 citing judgments 2008: 1 citing judgment 2013: 1 citing judgment 2016: 1 citing judgment 2017: 2 citing judgments 2019: 2 citing judgments 2020: 2 citing judgments, 1 negative 2022: 1 citing judgment 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. Zanaj v Mininster for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1766 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  2. Chelliah v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 200 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  3. Shahabuddin v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 273 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 5× · judgment
  4. Kodagodage v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 502 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  5. Bal v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1191 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 2× · judgment
  6. Kodagodage v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1275 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  7. Sevim v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1597 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 7× · judgment
  8. Zhang v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1706 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  9. SZGME v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCAFC 91 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 30× · 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 (11)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Wu Yu Fang & 117 Ors v The Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1996] FCA 106 Cited cited 25×
  2. Ramos v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1999) 91 FCR 329 Cited cited 2×
  3. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v A [1999] FCA 1679 Doubted cited 35×
  4. Transurban City Link Ltd v Allan [1999] FCA 1723 Applied or followed cited 96×
  5. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Thiyagarajah (2000) 169 ALR 515 Cited cited 9×
  6. Li Wen Han v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 421 Cited cited 17×
  7. Kundu v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 560 Cited cited 10×
  8. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Singh [2000] FCA 845 Applied or followed cited 231×
  9. Yilmaz v Minister in Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 906 Distinguished cited 60×
  10. Nader v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 908 Cited cited 29×
  11. Wimalaratne v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 964 Cited cited 8×
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.