Pinpoint · Judgment search

VAAC v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs

[2002] FCA 573

Federal Court of Australia · 8 May 2002 · Official judgment

Cited by 9 indexed judgments

All Applied or followed 1 Cited 8

2002: 3 citing judgments 2003: 3 citing judgments 2004: 1 citing judgment 2020: 1 citing judgment 2023: 1 citing judgment 2002 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. Alam v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 630 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 8× · judgment
  2. NAAO of 2002 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 834 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  3. Applicant NAFH v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 868 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  4. VDAU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCA 363 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 4× · judgment
  5. VHAJ v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 186 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 35× · judgment
  6. NARV v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 262 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 33× · judgment
  7. VDAU v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 32 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 6× · judgment
  8. BUK16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2020] FCA 558 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 2× · judgment
  9. EVU17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2023] FCA 1201 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · 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 (16)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Project Blue Sky Inc v Australian Broadcasting Authority [1998] HCA 28 Cited cited 2,785×
  2. Tharairasa v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 520 Cited cited 8×
  3. Applicant in V346 of 2000 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1179 Cited cited 3×
  4. Paul v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1196 Cited cited 126×
  5. Islam v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 430 Cited cited 6×
  6. Singh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 857 Cited cited 2×
  7. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Al Shamry [2001] FCA 919 Cited cited 121×
  8. Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Miah [2001] HCA 22 Cited cited 479×
  9. Wang v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 167 Cited cited 19×
  10. NAAX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 263 Cited cited 66×
  11. Baig v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 380 Distinguished cited 18×
  12. Turcan v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 397 Applied or followed cited 21×
  13. NABC v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCA 539 Applied or followed cited 15×
  14. Al Saqaf v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 6 Cited cited 3×
  15. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Bhardwaj [2002] HCA 11 Cited cited 579×
  16. Royal Botanic Gardens and Domain Trust v South Sydney City Council [2002] HCA 5 Cited cited 208×
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.