Pinpoint · Judgment search

Rossi v Qantas Airways Limited (No 2)

[2020] FCA 1080

Federal Court of Australia · 31 July 2020 · Official judgment

Cited by 11 indexed judgments

All Applied or followed 3 Cited 8

2020: 3 citing judgments 2021: 1 citing judgment 2022: 1 citing judgment 2023: 3 citing judgments 2024: 3 citing judgments 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. Wilson v Britten-Jones (No 2) [2020] FCA 1290 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 15× · judgment
  2. Clarke v South Eastern Sydney Local Health District [2020] FCA 1616 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · judgment
  3. Owen v Serendipity (WA) Pty Ltd t/as Advanced Personnel Management [2020] FCA 1826 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · judgment
  4. Cavanagh v School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Notre Dame [2021] FCA 300 Applied or followed Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  5. Chircop v Technical and Further Education Commission [2022] FCA 1015 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 10× · judgment
  6. Rossi v Qantas Airways Limited (No 4) [2023] FCA 1008 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 2× · judgment
  7. Sivwright v St Ives Group Pty Ltd (No 2) [2023] FCA 1063 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 4× · judgment
  8. Rossi v Qantas Airways Limited (No 5) [2023] FCA 1484 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  9. Constantinou v Australian Federal Police [2024] FCA 123 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 1× · judgment
  10. Rawson v South Metropolitan Health Service [2024] FCA 769 Cited Federal Court of Australia · judgment
  11. Rossi v Qantas Airways Ltd [2024] FCAFC 144 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · 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 (23)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Bainbrigge v Browne [1881] 18 Ch D 188 Cited
  2. Adelaide Corporation v Australasian Performing Right Association Ltd [1928] HCA 10 Cited cited 53×
  3. Manches v Trimborn (1946) 174 LT 344 Cited cited 4×
  4. Gibbons v Wright [1954] HCA 17 Cited cited 110×
  5. Griggs v Duke Power Co (1971) 401 US 424 Cited cited 10×
  6. Crago v McIntyre [1976] 1 NSWLR 729 Cited cited 20×
  7. R v Lawrence [1982] AC 510 Cited cited 40×
  8. Herron v McGregor (1985) 6 NSWLR 246 Cited
  9. Waters v Public Transport Corporation [1991] HCA 49 Cited cited 337×
  10. Louth v Diprose [1992] HCA 61 Cited cited 150×
  11. Brisbane South Regional Health Authority v Taylor [1996] HCA 25 Cited cited 683×
  12. Cooper v Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission [1999] FCA 180 Cited cited 18×
  13. Humane Society International Inc v Kyodo Senpaku Kaisha Ltd [2006] FCAFC 116 Cited cited 48×
  14. Abela v State of Victoria [2013] FCA 832 Cited cited 11×
  15. [2013] FMCA 36 Cited
  16. Dunwoodie v Teachers Mutual Bank Ltd [2014] NSWCA 24 Cited cited 33×
  17. Eliezer v University of Sydney [2015] FCA 1045 Cited cited 30×
  18. Kaur v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] FCA 584 Cited cited 15×
  19. Thorne v Kennedy [2017] HCA 49 Cited cited 97×
  20. DJS16 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 2037 Cited cited 11×
  21. James v WorkPower Inc [2018] FCA 2083 Cited cited 44×
  22. Budini v Sunnyfield [2019] FCA 2164 Cited cited 17×
  23. Croft v Sanders [2019] NSWCA 303 Cited cited 29×
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.