Federal Court of Australia · 11 November 2009 · Official judgment
No indexed judgment cites this case yet.
The authorities this case relies on, earliest first, and the authorities those relied on. Open a branch to go further back.
[2009] HCA 27 Cited cited 1,635×[1936] HCA 40 Cited cited 4,342×[1981] HCA 45 Cited cited 1,021×[1990] HCA 39 Cited cited 702×[1993] HCA 77 Cited cited 679×[1997] HCA 1 Overruled or disapproved cited 613×[1936] HCA 40 Cited cited 4,342×[1986] HCA 40 Cited cited 2,191×(1991) 33 FCR 397 Cited cited 1,469×[1994] HCA 40 Cited cited 981×[2006] HCA 27 Cited cited 528×[1936] HCA 40 Cited cited 4,342×[1964] HCA 69 Cited cited 2,085×[1986] HCA 33 Cited cited 1,127×[2003] HCA 22 Cited cited 1,476×Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.
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.