Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
S36/2014
|
| gptkbp:citedBy |
[2015] HCA 34
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:High_Court_of_Australia
|
| gptkbp:date |
2015-08-04
|
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
2015
|
| gptkbp:doctrine |
implied rights
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
R v. McCloy (No 36)
|
| gptkbp:impact |
political advertising regulations
|
| gptkbp:is_involved_in |
State of New South Wales
McCloy |
| gptkbp:judges |
gptkb:French_CJ
gptkb:Gageler_J none public interest freedom of expression regulatory framework unanimous constitutional interpretation Bell_J Kiefel_J Gordon_J Keane_J Nettle_J |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
proportionality test
freedom of political communication |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
constitutional validity
Crown_Solicitor McCloy’s_counsel |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
Australian_constitutional_law
|
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
judicial review
civil liberties freedom of assembly government regulation legal precedent political speech political rights constitutional law development democratic_process |
| gptkbp:outcome |
upheld the law
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
influenced future cases
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:McCloy_v._New_South_Wales
gptkb:Lange_v_Australian_Broadcasting_Corporation gptkb:Cole_v._Whitfield |
| gptkbp:significance |
landmark case
|
| gptkbp:soundtrack |
2015-06-03
|