CaseBase® Signals & Annotations

The CaseBase® signal is a visual representation which usually appears before a case name. It indicates the overall treatment of a case, with the colour and symbol indicating whether the case decision has received positive, negative, cautionary or neutral treatment in subsequent judgments.

When an annotation is added to CaseBase®, an algorithm runs to update the signal for that judgment to include the additional data. The algorithm takes into account factors like court hierarchy, judgment date and relationship between the citing and cited case. The signal applies to the judgment as a whole. Since any judgment can deal with multiple issues and arguments, a string of negative mentions of one aspect of the judgment results in a negative (or cautionary) signal for the whole judgment, even though other aspects of the judgment remain good law and continue to be treated positively.

Note: Not every case has a CaseBase® signal.

The table below explains the meaning of these signals.

Signal	Summary	Explanation
	Negative treatment	Warning – Negative treatment indicated. A negative (red) signal is given to decisions which have been subsequently reversed, disapproved or overruled.
	Cautionary treatment	Caution – Questioning or distinguishing treatment indicated. This indicates that the decision has had some doubt cast on it.
	Positive treatment	Positive treatment indicated. A positive (green) signal is given to decisions which have been subsequently affirmed, applied, etc.
	Neutral treatment	Neutral or citing treatment indicated. The decision has received neutral or ambivalent treatment: considered, explained, etc.
	Citation information	This indicates that no treatment has been given – only citation information is available.

Annotations

CaseBase Case Citator® has a team of legally trained editors reading judgments and assessing the nature of the relationships between judgments. This assessment results in the assignment of ‘Annotations’ to cases within tables in CaseBase®.

An annotation is a colour-coded rectangular tile displayed below the case name and parallel citations in a CaseBase® table. It provides information about the tone of the discussion of one judgment by another (e.g. Considered, Cited, Distinguished).

Case Annotations

The annotations below indicate how case was treated. These annotations are possible for both "Cases referring to this case" and the "Cases considered by this case" tabs in a citation document.

Annotation	Description
Applied	A principle of law articulated in the primary case is applied to a new set of facts by the court in the subsequent case.
Approved	The court in the subsequent case has approved the way the court in the primary case, being a court of inferior jurisdiction, has articulated a principle of law.
Cited	The primary case is merely cited by the court in the subsequent case, without comment.
Considered	The legal principles articulated in the primary case are considered or discussed by the court without adverse reflection or definitive application in the subsequent case.
Disapproved	The decision in the primary case is criticised by the court in the subsequent case.
Distinguished	The court in the subsequent case holds that the legal principles articulated by the primary case (usually otherwise persuasive or binding authority) do not apply because of some essential difference between the two cases in fact or law.
Explained	The decision reached in the primary case is justified by the court in the subsequent case, drawing attention to some feature of the primary case that may not be immediately obvious on its face.
Followed	The principle of law established in the case (or the dictum referred to) has been applied in the instant case.
Not Followed	The court in the subsequent case has declined to apply the principles of law articulated in the primary case.
Overruled	The legal principles articulated in the primary case are held to be incorrect by the court in the subsequent case, which is a court of superior or equivalent jurisdiction.
Questioned	The court in the subsequent case has expressed doubt about the decision in the primary case, but does not actually determine that the principles of law in the primary case are incorrect.

Note: Different principles in the primary case may be treated differently in the subsequent case, so that combinations such as Applied/distinguished are possible (indicating that one principle was applied and another distinguished).

Litigation History Annotations

The annotations below indicate both the prior and subsequent litigation history of the primary case. The annotations included in this table indicate whether the primary case is an appeal against an earlier decision, whether the primary case has itself been affirmed, varied or reversed on appeal and whether any judgments that are part of the same litigation are available.

Annotation	Description
Affirmed	The decision in the primary case is upheld on appeal or the primary case itself has affirmed an earlier decision.
Reversed	The decision in the primary case is overturned on appeal or the primary case itself has overturned an earlier decision.
Varied	The decision in the primary case is only partly reversed or partly affirmed by the subsequent case, or the primary case itself has partly reversed or partly affirmed an earlier decision.
Related	The decision in the subsequent or earlier case relates in some way to the primary case, but the court in the primary case is not assessing the merits of the related decision.
Special Leave Granted	Special leave to appeal the decision in the primary case to the High Court or Privy Council has been granted or the primary case is a decision granting special leave to appeal against an earlier decision.
Special Leave Refused	Special leave to appeal the decision in the primary case to the High Court or Privy Council has been refused or the primary case is a decision refusing special leave to appeal against an earlier decision.