Pinpoint · Judgment search

Thanh Tra Lam v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs

[2006] FCAFC 184 ; (2006) 157 FCR 215

Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · 19 December 2006 · Official judgment

Cited by 1 indexed judgment

All Cited 1

2008: 1 citing judgment 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. NTD8 v Australian Crime Commission (No 2) [2008] FCA 1551 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · 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 (8)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Minister of State for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Teoh [1995] HCA 20 Cited cited 502×
  2. Department of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs v Ram (1996) 69 FCR 431 Cited cited 5×
  3. Browne v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (1998) 27 AAR 353 Cited
  4. Tien, William & Ors v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [1998] FCA 1552 Cited cited 14×
  5. Baldini v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 173 Cited cited 4×
  6. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v W157/00A [2002] FCAFC 281 Cited cited 51×
  7. Awa v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2002] FCAFC 63; [2002] FCAFC 63 Cited cited 7×
  8. Dryden v Macks (Trustee in Bankruptcy) [2005] FCA 1480 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.