Pinpoint · Judgment search

Mukiza v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs

[2021] FCA 1503

Federal Court of Australia · 30 November 2021 · Official judgment

Cited by 5 indexed judgments

All Distinguished 1 Cited 4

2022: 4 citing judgments 2024: 1 citing judgment, 1 negative 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 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. GXXS v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 468 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 14× · judgment
  2. Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v Mukiza [2022] FCAFC 89 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 6× · judgment
  3. Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs v Mukiza [2022] FCAFC 105 Cited Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 10× · judgment
  4. WCGD v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2022] FCA 1419 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · judgment
  5. XRZG v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs [2024] FCAFC 131 Distinguished Federal Court of Australia (Full Court) · cited 1× · 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 (19)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. Brisbane City Council v AG of Queensland (1978) 19 ALR 681 Cited cited 4×
  2. Australian Broadcasting Tribunal v Bond [1990] HCA 33 Cited cited 2,077×
  3. Immigration and Ethnic Affairs, Minister for v Wu Shan Liang [1996] HCA 6 Cited cited 2,712×
  4. SFGB v Minister for Immigration & Multicultural & Indigenous Affairs [2003] FCAFC 231 Cited cited 81×
  5. Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth of Australia [2003] HCA 2 Cited cited 1,335×
  6. Soliman v University of Technology, Sydney [2012] FCAFC 146 Cited cited 72×
  7. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Singh [2014] FCAFC 1 Cited cited 378×
  8. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v WZARH [2015] HCA 40 Cited cited 221×
  9. Minister for Immigration and Border Protection v Stretton [2016] FCAFC 11 Cited cited 478×
  10. Marzano v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2017] FCAFC 66 Cited cited 24×
  11. McLachlan v Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 109 Cited cited 26×
  12. Schmidt v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCA 1162 Cited cited 18×
  13. Hands v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] FCAFC 225 Cited cited 166×
  14. Hossain v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2018] HCA 34 Cited cited 627×
  15. EZA20 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCA 1775 Cited cited 3×
  16. Webb v Minister for Home Affairs [2020] FCA 831 Cited cited 9×
  17. Viane v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 144 Cited cited 18×
  18. BHL19 v Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs [2020] FCAFC 94 Cited cited 53×
  19. [2021] AATA 1488 Cited cited 2×
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.