7 AGLC Subsequent References
Subsequent References
AGLC 1.4 outlines general rules for subsequent citations to sources. All sources must be referenced in full the first time that they are cited. Subsequent citations should use an abbreviated form of the original citation.
Note, there are two different ways to indicate a subsequent reference, depending on whether or not it immediately follows the earlier citation.
Ibid
Use the abbreviation “ibid” if a source is identical to a source cited in the immediately preceding footnote. This applies regardless of whether the preceding footnote is a full citation or an abbreviated version. Ibid cannot be used if the immediately preceding footnote contains multiple sources. Add a new pinpoint reference where relevant.
Subsequent referencing where ibid does not apply
To reference a source cited earlier in the document, but not in the immediately preceding footnote, use an abbreviated version of the source and a cross-reference to the initial citation. For authored secondary sources, this includes the author/s last name, a cross-reference to the original footnote and any new pinpoint references.
Where a source is not authored, or the author is an organisation or institution, assign a short title after the initial full citation of the source. The short title should appear inside parentheses after any pinpoint references, but before the closing punctuation, and be enclosed by single quotation marks. Aside from these requirements, the format of short titles should adhere to the general title rules for that particular source type.
For subsequent references to the source, use the short title, a cross-reference to the initial footnote number and any new pinpoint references.
The AGLC provides additional explanations and examples of subsequent referencing for the following types of sources:
- Cases — refer to 2.1.14
- Legislation — refer to 3.5
- Secondary sources — refer to 4.3
Example list of subsequent references in AGLC style
1 Commonwealth v Tasmania (1983) 158 CLR 1 (‘Tasmanian Dam Case’).
2 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co [1893] 1 QB 256, 265 (‘Carlill’).
3 Ibid 268.
4 Tasmanian Dam Case (n 1).
5 Carlill (n 2) 270.
6 R v Demicoli [1971] Qd R 358 (‘Demicoli’).
7 Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth) s 5 (‘ADJR Act’).
8 Ibid s 9.
9 Ibid.
10 Ian Barker, ‘Judicial Activism in Australia: A Perspective’ (2005) 79(12) Australian Law Journal 783, 785; Robin Creyke et al, Laying Down the Law (LexisNexis, 11th ed, 2021) 224.
11 Creyke et al (n 10) 226.
12 Ibid 225.
13 ‘The Right to Vote is Not Enjoyed Equally by All Australians’, Australian Human Rights Commission (Web Page, February 2010) <https://humanrights.gov.au/our-work/rights-and-freedoms/publications/right-vote-not-enjoyed-equally-all-australians> (‘The Right to Vote’).
14 ADJR Act (n 7) s 13(1).
15 The Right to Vote (n 13).
