Pinpoint · Judgment search

R v DANNEVIG, Christopher James

[2012] NSWSC 1013

Supreme Court of NSW · 31 August 2012 · Official judgment

Cited by 1 indexed judgment

All Cited 1

2013: 1 citing judgment 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. R v Kaewklom (No. 3) [2013] NSWSC 59 Cited Supreme Court of NSW · cited 3× · 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 (13)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. R v Hill (1981) 3 A Crim R 397 Cited cited 121×
  2. Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14 Cited cited 1,716×
  3. R v Low (1991) 57 A Crim R 8 Applied or followed cited 25×
  4. Wilson v The Queen [1992] HCA 31 Cited cited 92×
  5. R v Gordon (1994) 71 A Crim R 459 Cited cited 75×
  6. R v Harrison (1997) 93 A Crim R 314 Cited cited 22×
  7. R v Previtera (1997) 94 A Crim R 76 Cited cited 318×
  8. Regina v AEM Snr; Regina v KEM; Regina v MM [2002] NSWCCA 58 Cited cited 197×
  9. REGINA v S L D [2003] NSWCCA 310 Cited cited 36×
  10. Fardon v Attorney-General for the State of Queensland [2004] HCA 46 Cited cited 120×
  11. R v Skura [2004] VSCA 53 Cited cited 28×
  12. Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Cited cited 1,099×
  13. Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 Cited cited 1,670×
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.