Pinpoint · Judgment search

Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Lux Distributors Pty Ltd (No 2)

[2015] FCA 903

Federal Court of Australia · 21 August 2015 · Official judgment

Cited by 3 indexed judgments

All Cited 3

2016: 2 citing judgments 2019: 1 citing judgment 2015 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. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Clinica Internationale Pty Ltd (No 2) [2016] FCA 62 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 24× · judgment
  2. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Multimedia International Services Pty Ltd [2016] FCA 439 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 11× · judgment
  3. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v Unique International College Pty Ltd (Imposition of Penalty) [2019] FCA 1773 Cited Federal Court of Australia · 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 (5)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Trade Practices Commission v CSR Ltd [1990] FCA 521 Cited cited 62×
  2. N W Frozen Foods Proprietary Ltd v Australian Competition & Consumer Commission [1996] FCA 1134 Cited cited 507×
  3. Minister for Industry, Tourism & Resources v Mobil Oil Australia Pty Ltd [2004] FCAFC 72 Cited cited 168×
  4. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission v BAJV Pty Ltd [2014] FCAFC 52 Cited cited 28×
  5. Director, Fair Work Building Industry Inspectorate v Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union [2015] FCAFC 59 Cited cited 59×
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.