Pinpoint · Judgment search

W217/01A v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs

[2002] FCA 892

Federal Court of Australia · 1 August 2002 · Official judgment

Cited by 0 indexed judgments

No indexed judgment cites this case yet.

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.

Authorities cited (16)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Secretary of State for Education and Science v Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council [1976] UKHL 6 Cited cited 55×
  2. Television Capricornia Pty Ltd v Australian Broadcasting Tribunal (1986) 70 ALR 147 Cited cited 8×
  3. Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond [1990] HCA 33 Applied or followed cited 2,077×
  4. Curragh Queensland Mining Ltd v Daniel (1992) 34 FCR 212 Cited cited 185×
  5. A v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (2000) 101 FCR 478 Not followed cited 9×
  6. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Rajamanikkam (2000) 179 ALR 495 Cited cited 10×
  7. Kheirollahpoor v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 1350 Cited cited 8×
  8. Guden v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 236 Applied or followed cited 22×
  9. Abila v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1186 Not followed cited 6×
  10. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Applicant C [2001] FCA 1332 Cited cited 31×
  11. Sarancharkh v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 1461 Not followed cited 4×
  12. Jegatheeswaran v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2001] FCA 865 Applied or followed cited 36×
  13. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf [2001] HCA 30 Applied or followed cited 1,750×
  14. Kamal v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCA 818 Applied or followed cited 2×
  15. Aala v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2002] FCAFC 204 Cited cited 4×
  16. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Bhardwaj [2002] HCA 11 Applied or followed cited 579×
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.