Pinpoint · Judgment search

HJ (Iran) v Secretary for the Home Department

[2010] UKSC 31 ; [2011] 1 AC 596

UKSC · 2010 · Find the judgment

Cited by 7 indexed judgments

All Distinguished 1 Cited 6

2013: 1 citing judgment, 1 negative 2014: 1 citing judgment 2015: 3 citing judgments 2018: 1 citing judgment 2021: 1 citing judgment 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. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZSCA [2013] FCAFC 155 Distinguished Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 2× · judgment
  2. WZAPN v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] FCA 947 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 46× · judgment
  3. SZTIB v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCAFC 40 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 7× · judgment
  4. BZAFM v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCAFC 41 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 8× · judgment
  5. SZTEQ v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCAFC 39 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 25× · judgment
  6. AWL17 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 570 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · judgment
  7. DQU16 v Minister for Home Affairs [2021] HCA 10 Cited High Court of Australia · cited 26× · judgment

Tree of authority

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.

This judgment is not in the index, so the authorities it cites are not known here. It is shown because indexed judgments cite it.

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.