Statements (50)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:area |
administrative law
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:High_Court_of_Australia
|
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
2015
|
| gptkbp:doctrine |
judicial independence
freedom of religion constitutional law judicial review separation of powers freedom of assembly freedom of expression right to a fair trial rule of law due process equal protection under the law right to privacy freedom from discrimination public law freedom of association common law principles statutory interpretation administrative discretion right to property right to security implied rights |
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
R v. McCloy (No 21)
|
| gptkbp:impact |
land use planning laws
|
| gptkbp:is_involved_in |
State of New South Wales
McCloy |
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:French_CJ
gptkb:Gageler_J unanimous Bell_J Kiefel_J Gordon_J Keane_J Nettle_J |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
public interest
local government powers proportionality freedom of political communication |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
[2015] HCA 34
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
upheld the validity of the law
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
influenced future cases
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Lange_v_Australian_Broadcasting_Corporation
gptkb:Australian_Capital_Television_Pty_Ltd_v_Commonwealth gptkb:Lehman_v_New_South_Wales gptkb:McCloy_v_New_South_Wales gptkb:Theophanous_v_Herald_&_Weekly_Times_Ltd |
| gptkbp:significance |
land use regulation
|