Pinpoint · Judgment search

BEB16 v Minister for Home Affairs

[2019] FCA 2097

Federal Court of Australia · 13 December 2019 · Official judgment

Cited by 0 indexed judgments

No indexed judgment cites this case yet.

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.

Authorities cited (16)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. O'Brien v Komesaroff [1982] HCA 33 Cited cited 408×
  2. Coulton v Holcombe [1986] HCA 33 Cited cited 1,127×
  3. Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs v Li [2000] FCA 1456 Cited cited 35×
  4. Samuel v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 854 Cited cited 5×
  5. Yilmaz v Minister in Immigration & Multicultural Affairs [2000] FCA 906 Cited cited 60×
  6. Branir Pty Ltd v Owston Nominees (No 2) Pty Ltd [2001] FCA 1833 Cited cited 659×
  7. Re Refugee Review Tribunal; Ex parte H [2001] HCA 28 Cited cited 318×
  8. VUAX v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2004] FCAFC 158 Cited cited 600×
  9. SZGME v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2008] FCAFC 91 Cited cited 30×
  10. Summers v Repatriation Commission [2015] FCAFC 36 Cited cited 55×
  11. Haritos v Commissioner of Taxation [2015] FCAFC 92 Cited cited 286×
  12. Sun v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2016] FCAFC 52 Cited cited 94×
  13. Murad v Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 73 Cited cited 81×
  14. CPD16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 322 Cited
  15. BEB16 v Minister for Immigration & Anor [2019] FCCA 1147 Cited
  16. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v SZMTA [2019] HCA 3 Cited cited 693×
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.