Pinpoint · Judgment search

SZBAL v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs

[2005] FCA 263

Federal Court of Australia · 6 May 2005 · 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 (17)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Buck v Bavone [1976] HCA 24 Cited cited 325×
  2. Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1985) 162 CLR 24 Cited cited 35×
  3. Coulton v Holcombe [1986] HCA 33 Applied or followed cited 1,127×
  4. Welivita, Udeni v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs & Anor [1996] FCA 989 Cited
  5. Applicant A v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs [1997] 190 CLR 225 Cited cited 3×
  6. Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs v Guo Wei Rong [1997] HCA 22 Cited cited 776×
  7. Saliba, Salim v Minister for Immigration & Ethnic Affairs [1998] FCA 1461 Cited cited 21×
  8. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Eshetu [1999] HCA 21 Cited cited 971×
  9. Chen Shi Hai v The Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2000] HCA 19 Cited cited 155×
  10. Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1833 Cited cited 659×
  11. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs v Yusuf [2001] HCA 30 Cited cited 1,750×
  12. R (Sivakumar) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2003] 1 WLR 840 Cited cited 6×
  13. Re Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs; Ex parte Applicant S20/2002 [2003] HCA 30 Cited cited 648×
  14. Applicant S454/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 1136 Distinguished cited 2×
  15. VUAX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 158 Cited cited 600×
  16. Applicant S v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs [2004] HCA 25 Cited cited 78×
  17. TCN Channel Nine Pty Limited v Network Ten Pty Limited (No 2) [2005] FCAFC 53 Cited
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.