Williams v Commonwealth of Australia has the following parallel citations: (2014) 252 CLR 416; (2014) 309 ALR 41; (2014) 88 ALJR 701;  HCA 23; BC201404736. Rule 2.2.2 lists citation preferences:
A reported version of a case should be cited in preference to an unreported version.
If the case is reported in an authorised report series, this version must be used. Authorised reports contain judgments that have been reviewed by the judges or judge's Associate, prior to the publication. They are therefore considered to be an accurate record of the judgment. See the list of authorised report series for a range of jurisdictions below.
If a case is reported, but not in an authorised series, the unauthorised report series should be cited in the following order of preference:
generalist report series such as ALR (Australian Law Reports); ALJR (Australian Law Journal Reports)
specialist report series such as A Crim R (Australian Criminal Law Reports); MVR (Motor Vehicle Reports)
If the case is unreported the order of preference is:
the medium neutral citation assigned by the Court eg:  HCA 80 or if the case has no medium neutral citation the citation convention used in AGLC Rule 2.3.2.
Note that in the Willams v Commonwealth of Australia example given above, the order the citations appear is generally the order of citation preference. This is taken from CaseBase on LexisNexisAu. Westlaw AU does not provide citations in this type of order, although all citations will be provided.
The correct citation for this judgment is Williams v Commonwealth of Australia (2014) 252 CLR 416.