Pinpoint · Judgment search

Lennox v Amcor Limited trading as Amcor Cartonboard (No 2)

[2009] FCA 962

Federal Court of Australia · 25 August 2009 · Official judgment

Cited by 5 indexed judgments

All Applied or followed 4 Cited 1

2013: 1 citing judgment 2019: 1 citing judgment 2021: 1 citing judgment 2023: 1 citing judgment 2025: 1 citing judgment 2009 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. Digital Cinema Network Pty Ltd v Omnilab Media Pty Limited [2013] FCA 1060 Cited 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 (12)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Maxwell v Keun [1928] 1 KB 645 Cited cited 43×
  2. House v The King [1936] HCA 40 Applied or followed cited 4,342×
  3. Dick v Piller [1943] KB 497 Cited cited 6×
  4. In re Will of FB Gilbert (dec) [1946] NSWStRp 24 Cited cited 347×
  5. Jordan v Smart [1961] NSWR 735 Cited cited 6×
  6. Adam P Brown Male Fashions Pty Ltd v Philip Morris Inc [1981] HCA 39 Cited cited 623×
  7. Thornberry v The Queen (1995) 69 ALJR 777 Cited cited 19×
  8. Jarrett v Westpac Banking Corp [1999] FCA 425 Cited cited 14×
  9. Trivett v Zoccoli [2002] WASCA 138 Cited cited 2×
  10. Goldberg v Morrow [2004] FCA 1490 Cited cited 8×
  11. Lennox v Amcor Limited trading as Amcor Cartonboard [2009] FCA 959 Cited
  12. Aon Risk Services Australia Limited v Australian National University [2009] HCA 27 Distinguished cited 1,635×
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.