Pinpoint · Judgment search

Challita v NSW Department of Education and Training

[2009] NSWADT 116

Administrative Decisions Tribunal (NSW) · 22 May 2009 · Official judgment

Cited by 3 indexed judgments

All Cited 3

2009: 1 citing judgment 2010: 2 citing judgments 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. Challita v NSW Department of Education and Training (GD) [2009] NSWADTAP 70 Cited ADT Appeal Panel (NSW) · cited 8× · judgment
  2. Sheppard v Commissioner for Fair Trading, NSW Office of Fair Trading [2010] NSWADT 192 Cited Administrative Decisions Tribunal (NSW) · cited 1× · judgment
  3. Gofur v Ministry of Transport [2010] NSWADT 197 Cited Administrative Decisions Tribunal (NSW) · 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 (6)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Chapman v Commissioner of Police, New South Wales Police [2004] NSWADT 35 Cited cited 37×
  2. Challita v Director-General, Department of Education and Training [2006] NSWADT 109 Cited cited 3×
  3. Cianfrano v Director General, Premier's Department [2006] NSWADT 137 Cited cited 50×
  4. Cianfrano v Director General, Premier's Department (GD) [2006] NSWADTAP 48 Cited cited 6×
  5. McGuirk v University of New South Wales [2007] NSWADT 270 Cited cited 5×
  6. Roads and Traffic Authority, New South Wales v Hutchinson (GD) [2007] NSWADTAP 28 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.