Pinpoint · Judgment search

R v Mailes

[2003] NSWSC 707 ; (2003) 142 A Crim R 353

Supreme Court of NSW · 1 August 2003 · Official judgment

Cited by 6 indexed judgments

All Cited 6

2004: 1 citing judgment 2006: 1 citing judgment 2018: 1 citing judgment 2021: 1 citing judgment 2022: 1 citing judgment 2023: 1 citing judgment 2003 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 Graham Edward Mailes [2004] NSWCCA 394 Cited NSW Court of Criminal Appeal · cited 22× · judgment
  2. MAILES v DPP AND 1 OR [2006] NSWSC 267 Cited Supreme Court of NSW · cited 4× · judgment
  3. R v SMP [2018] NSWLC 2 Cited Local Court of NSW · judgment
  4. Attorney General for New South Wales v Mailes (Preliminary) [2021] NSWSC 298 Cited Supreme Court of NSW · judgment
  5. R v JDS (No. 2) [2022] NSWDC 103 Cited District Court of NSW · judgment
  6. R v Boujandy (No. 5) [2023] NSWDC 316 Cited District Court of NSW · 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. R v Gilmore (1979) 1 A Crim R 416 Cited cited 28×
  2. R v Bedford (1986) 5 NSWLR 711 Cited cited 18×
  3. Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14 Cited cited 1,716×
  4. R v Scognamiglio (1991) 56 A Crim R 81 Cited cited 118×
  5. R v Mitchell [1999] NSWCCA 120 Cited cited 19×
  6. R H McL v The Queen [2000] HCA 46 Cited cited 41×
  7. R v Merritt [2000] NSWCCA 365 Cited cited 13×
  8. R v Mitchell [2002] NSWCCA 380 Cited cited 4×
  9. R v MM [2002] NSWCCA 431 Cited cited 12×
  10. Weininger v The Queen [2003] HCA 14 Cited cited 242×
  11. Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT) [2003] HCA 28 Cited cited 180×
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.