Pinpoint · Judgment search

Kearns v Chief of Army

[2022] ADFDAT 3

Defence Force Discipline Appeal Tribunal · 12 August 2022 · Official judgment

Cited by 3 indexed judgments

All Cited 3

2022: 1 citing judgment 2023: 2 citing judgments 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. Kantibye v Chief of Army (No 2) [2022] ADFDAT 4 Cited Defence Force Discipline Appeal Tribunal · cited 2× · judgment
  2. Burns v Chief of the Defence Force (No 2) [2023] FCA 866 Cited Federal Court of Australia · cited 3× · judgment
  3. Poulton v Chief of Navy [2023] ADFDAT 1 Cited Defence Force Discipline Appeal Tribunal · 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 (12)

Earliest first, with how this judgment treated each.

  1. R v Murray (1987) 11 NSWLR 12 Cited cited 162×
  2. Coulter v The Queen [1988] HCA 3 Cited cited 163×
  3. R v Rodriguez (1997) 93 A Crim R 535 Cited cited 6×
  4. Palmer v The Queen [1998] HCA 2 Cited cited 86×
  5. Fulton v Chief of Army [2005] ADFDAT 1 Cited cited 4×
  6. Lane v Morrison [2009] HCA 29 Cited cited 25×
  7. Yewsang v Chief of Army [2013] ADFDAT 1 Cited cited 7×
  8. Angre v Chief of Navy (No 3) [2017] ADFDAT 2 Cited cited 8×
  9. Randall v Chief of Army [2018] ADFDAT 3 Cited cited 3×
  10. Pell v The Queen [2020] HCA 12 Cited cited 198×
  11. Private R Army v Chief of Army [2022] ADFDAT 1 Cited cited 6×
  12. Tomlinson v R [2022] NSWCCA 16 Cited cited 17×
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.