Pinpoint · Judgment search

Adamas v The Hon Brendan O'Connor (No 3)

[2012] FCA 365

Federal Court of Australia · 12 April 2012 · Official judgment

Cited by 4 indexed judgments

All Cited 4

2019: 2 citing judgments 2021: 2 citing judgments 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026
citing judgments per year of which distinguished, doubted, not followed or overruled · line marks the decision

Sort: Oldest first Newest first Most cited

  1. Tsvetnenko v United States of America [2019] FCA 206 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  2. Ruhe (Trustee), in the matter of Power (Bankrupt) [2019] FCA 2179 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  3. Matson v Attorney-General (Cth) [2021] FCA 161 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 16× · judgment
  4. United States of America v Kumar aka Valentine [2021] NSWLC 5 Cited Local Court of NSW · 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 (11)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Prevato v Governor of Metropolitan Remand Centre (1986) 8 FCR 358 Cited cited 13×
  2. Hempel v Moore (1987) 13 FCR 480 Cited cited 7×
  3. Hempel v Moore (1987) 70 ALR 714 Cited cited 6×
  4. Elmi v Minister for Immigration and Ethnic Affairs (1988) 17 ALD 471 Cited cited 7×
  5. Peniche v Vanstone [1999] FCA 1688 Cited cited 13×
  6. Chan v Minister for Justice & Customs [2001] FCA 170 Cited cited 7×
  7. United Mexican States v Cabal [2001] HCA 60 Cited cited 79×
  8. Zentai v Honourable Brendan O’Connor [2009] FCA 1597 Cited cited 9×
  9. Zentai v Honourable Brendan O'Connor (No 4) [2010] FCA 1385 Cited cited 4×
  10. O'Connor v Zentai [2011] FCAFC 102 Cited cited 10×
  11. Adamas v The Honourable Brendan O'Connor (No 2) [2012] FCA 227 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.