Pinpoint · Judgment search

Dezfouli v Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network

[2015] NSWCATAD 159

NCAT Administrative and Equal Opportunity · 3 August 2015 · Official judgment

Cited by 2 indexed judgments

All Cited 2

2016: 1 citing judgment 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. CHB v Children’s Guardian [2016] NSWCATAD 214 Cited NCAT Administrative and Equal Opportunity · cited 137× · judgment
  2. Dezfouli v Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network; Dezfouli v Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network; Dezfouli v Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network; Dezfouli v NSW Ombudsman [2019] NSWCATAD 31 Cited NCAT Administrative and Equal Opportunity · 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 (5)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Eastman v Director of Public Prosecutions (ACT) [2003] HCA 28 Cited cited 180×
  2. Purvis v New South Wales (Department of Education and Training) [2003] HCA 62 Cited cited 351×
  3. NT Power Generation Pty Ltd v Power and Water Authority [2004] HCA 48 Cited cited 82×
  4. Bale & Anor v Mills [2011] NSWCA 226 Cited cited 91×
  5. Dezfouli v Justice Health and Forensic Mental Health Network [2015] NSWCATAD 11 Cited cited 6×
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.