Pinpoint · Judgment search

SZFOG v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs

[2006] FCA 1170

Federal Court of Australia · 8 September 2006 · Official judgment

Cited by 7 indexed judgments

All Not followed 1 Distinguished 1 Cited 5

2007: 4 citing judgments, 1 negative 2016: 1 citing judgment 2017: 1 citing judgment 2018: 1 citing judgment, 1 negative 2006 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. SZKFC v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 687 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  2. MZXOW v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2007] FCA 2115 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  3. MZXPP v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 2116 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  4. NBHV v Minister for Immigration & Citizenship [2007] FCA 1749 Distinguished Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  5. Tyne (Trustee) v UBS AG [2016] FCA 241 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 14× · judgment
  6. Tyne (Trustee) v UBS AG (No 2) [2017] FCAFC 5 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 13× · judgment
  7. DZY17 v Minister for Home Affairs [2018] FCAFC 196 Not followed Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 2× · 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 (15)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. House v The King [1936] HCA 40 Applied or followed cited 4,342×
  2. Al-Mehdawi v Secretary of State for the Home Department [1990] 1 AC 876 Cited cited 29×
  3. Walton v Gardiner [1993] HCA 77 Applied or followed cited 679×
  4. NADK of 2002 v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 184 Cited cited 27×
  5. Hot Holdings Pty Ltd v Creasy [2002] HCA 51 Cited cited 104×
  6. B41 of 2003, in the matter of an application for a Writ of Mandamus, Prohibition and Certiorari against Refugee Review Tribunal [2004] FCA 30 Cited cited 11×
  7. SQMB v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 979 Cited cited 2×
  8. Wong v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 242 Distinguished cited 71×
  9. [2004] FMCA 1002 Distinguished cited 2×
  10. SZFOG v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 1374 Cited cited 8×
  11. Applicants 42/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCA 207 Distinguished cited 3×
  12. Applicants S503/2003 v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs [2005] FCAFC 133 Distinguished cited 5×
  13. SZFOG v Minister for Immigration [2005] FMCA 1081 Cited cited 2×
  14. [2005] HCATrans 967 Distinguished
  15. SZEYH v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs and Anor (2006) 150 FCR 397 Cited cited 3×
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.