Pinpoint · Judgment search

Tervonen v Finland

[2008] FCA 1133

Federal Court of Australia · 6 August 2008 · Official judgment

Cited by 3 indexed judgments

All Doubted 1 Cited 2

2008: 1 citing judgment 2012: 2 citing judgments, 1 negative 2008 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. Tervonen v Finland [2008] FCA 1539 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  2. Marku v Republic of Albania [2012] FCA 804 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 6× · judgment
  3. Marku v Republic of Albania (No 3) [2012] FCA 1183 Doubted Federal Court of Australia · 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 (22)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Port of Melbourne Authority v Anshun Pty Ltd [1981] HCA 45 Applied or followed cited 1,021×
  2. Mirror Newspapers Ltd v Harrison [1982] HCA 50 Cited cited 117×
  3. R v Secretary of State for the Environment; Ex parte Hackney London Borough Council [1984] 1 All ER 358 Cited
  4. R v Secretary of State for the Environment; Ex parte Hackney London Borough Council [1984] 1 All ER 956 Cited cited 2×
  5. Taylor v Ansett Transport Industries Ltd [1987] FCA 127 Applied or followed cited 39×
  6. Walton v Gardiner [1992] HCA 12 Applied or followed cited 18×
  7. (1994) 20 Mon Univ L Rev 21 Cited
  8. Public Prosecutions (Cth), Director of v Kainhofer [1995] HCA 35 Cited cited 87×
  9. Ling v Commonwealth [1996] FCA 1646 Cited cited 57×
  10. (1997) 71 ALJ 934 Cited cited 9×
  11. Dutton v Republic of South Africa [1999] FCA 1016 Applied or followed cited 7×
  12. Coffey v Secretary, Department of Social Security [1999] FCA 375 Applied or followed cited 39×
  13. SZBJM v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCA 404 Applied or followed cited 5×
  14. Wong v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 242 Applied or followed cited 71×
  15. Tervonen v Minister for Justice and Customs [2007] FCA 1684 Cited cited 21×
  16. Brock v Minister for Justice and Customs [2007] FCA 2091 Cited cited 10×
  17. Rivera v Minister Administering the Extradition Act 1988 (Cth) [2007] FCAFC 191 Cited cited 7×
  18. Williams v Minister for Justice and Customs of the Commonwealth of Australia [2007] FCAFC 33 Cited cited 20×
  19. Tervonen v Finland [2008] FCA 781 Applied or followed cited 6×
  20. Tervonen v Minister for Home Affairs (No 2) [2008] FCA 872 Cited cited 5×
  21. Australian Education Union v Lawler [2008] FCAFC 135 Applied or followed cited 18×
  22. Minister for Home Affairs v Tervonen [2008] FCAFC 24 Cited cited 17×
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.