Statements (54)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:citedBy |
[2015] HCA 34
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:High_Court_of_Australia
|
| gptkbp:decidedBy |
2015
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
R v. McCloy (No 50)
|
| gptkbp:impact |
influenced public policy
influenced legal reforms shaped future legal arguments examined legal precedents influenced electoral laws examined balance of rights examined electoral fairness shaped constitutional debates addressed freedom of expression addressed legal challenges addressed public interest affected campaign finance regulations analyzed government accountability analyzed government regulation analyzed political rights contributed to academic discussions contributed to legal discourse debated legal interpretations discussed judicial reasoning discussed limitations on rights discussed rights limitations examined constitutional validity examined public policy implications reviewed civil liberties reviewed electoral integrity reviewed judicial scrutiny shaped political communication laws discussed_democratic_principles |
| 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 |
proportionality test
freedom of political communication |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
represented by barristers
represented by solicitors |
| gptkbp:legalStatus |
Australian_constitutional_law
|
| gptkbp:outcome |
upheld the law
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
influenced future cases
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Coleman_v_Power
gptkb:Lange_v_Australian_Broadcasting_Corporation gptkb:McCloy_v_New_South_Wales |
| gptkbp:significance |
landmark case
|