|
Clubb V Edwards
Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery is a decision of the High Court of Australia.. . It was a combined hearing of two appeals, raised from the Magistrates Court of Victoria and Tasmania respectively. The appellants, Kathleen Clubb and John Preston; had sought to challenge two laws restricting their conduct near abortion providers, on the ground that the relevant laws were unconstitutional for breach of Australia's freedom of political communication doctrine. Both appeals were unanimously dismissed by the court. Factual Background Section 185D of the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008 (Vic), prohibited communication about abortions, conditional on that communication being with a person accessing an abortion provider within a 'safe access zone', and the communication being likely to cause distress or anxiety. Section 9(2) of the ''Reproductive Health (Access to Terminations) Act 2013'' (Tas), prohibited abortion protests that could be seen or heard by a person accessing a clinic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
High Court Of Australia
The High Court of Australia is Australia's apex court. It exercises Original jurisdiction, original and appellate jurisdiction on matters specified within Constitution of Australia, Australia's Constitution. The High Court was established following passage of the ''Judiciary Act 1903''. It derives its authority from Chapter III of the Australian Constitution, which vests it responsibility for the judiciary, judicial power of the Commonwealth. Important legal instruments pertaining to the High Court include the ''Judiciary Act 1903'' and the ''High Court of Australia Act 1979''.. Its bench is composed of seven justices, including a Chief Justice of Australia, Chief Justice, currently Susan Kiefel. Justices of the High Court are appointed by the Governor-General of Australia, Governor-General on the Advice (constitutional law), advice of the Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister and are appointed permanently until their mandatory retirement at age 70, unless they retire ea ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Plurality Opinion
A plurality opinion is in certain legal systems the opinion from one or more judges or justices of an appellate court which provides the rationale for the disposition of an appeal when no single opinion received the support of a majority of the court. The plurality opinion did not receive the support of more than half the justices, but still received more support than any other opinion, excluding those justices dissenting from the holding of the court. By country United States In ''Marks v. United States'', 430 U.S. 188 (1977), the Supreme Court of the United States explained how the holding of a case should be viewed where there is no majority supporting the rationale of any opinion: “When a fragmented Court decides a case and no single rationale explaining the result enjoys the assent of five Justices, the holding of the Court may be viewed as that position taken by those Members who concurred in the judgments on the narrowest grounds.” That requires lower courts t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Martyn Iles
*
{{disambiguation ...
Martyn may refer to: *Martyn (surname), one of the Tribes of Galway and others *Martyn (given name) See also *Martin (other) *Marten (other) *Martin of Tours Martin of Tours ( la, Sanctus Martinus Turonensis; 316/336 – 8 November 397), also known as Martin the Merciful, was the third bishop of Tours. He has become one of the most familiar and recognizable Christian saints in France, heralded as the ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Proportionality (law)
Proportionality is a general principle in law which covers several separate (although related) concepts: *The concept of proportionality is used as a criterion of fairness and justice in statutory interpretation processes, especially in constitutional law, as a logical method intended to assist in discerning the correct balance between the restriction imposed by a corrective measure and the severity of the nature of the prohibited act. *Within criminal law, the concept is used to convey the idea that the punishment of an offender should fit the crime. *Under international humanitarian law governing the legal use of force in an armed conflict, ''proportionality'' and '' distinction'' are important factors in assessing military necessity. *Under the United Kingdom's Civil Procedure Rules, costs must be "proportionately and reasonably incurred", or "proportionate and reasonable in amount", if they are to form part of a court ruling on costs. Proportionality as a general principle ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Adrienne Stone
Adrienne Stone is an Australian legal academic specialising in the areas of constitutional law and constitutional theory, with particular expertise in freedom of expression. Academic career As of 2020, Stone is a Redmond Barry Distinguished Professor at the University of Melbourne. She holds a Chair at Melbourne Law School, and is a director at the school's Centre for Comparative Constitutional Studies. Additionally, she is the president of the International Association of Constitutional Law, and is an elected Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences in Australia and the Australian Academy of Law The Australian Academy of Law (AAL) is a permanent, non-government organisation devoted to the advancement of the discipline of law. According to its Constitution, the Australian Academy of Law comprises individuals of exceptional distinction from a .... Selected publications * ''Open Minds: Academic Freedom and Freedom of Speech'' (2020) * ''Oxford Handbook on the Australian Con ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Comcare V Banerji
Comcare v Banerji is a decision of the High Court of Australia. It was an appeal brought by Comcare against former public servant Michaela Banerji, seeking to overturn a decision of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal. The tribunal had declared that termination of her employment was not a reasonable administrative action; once regard was had to the implied freedom of political communication.. The court ruled unanimously that provisions of the ''Public Service Act 1999'' (Cth), regarding the termination of a public servant's employment, did not contravene the implied freedom of political communication. It further ruled that the decision to terminate her employment based on her use of an anonymous Twitter account was not otherwise unlawful. Factual Background Banerji was a public servant at the Australian Human Rights Commission, which later became part of the then-named Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIC). In 2012, she began to use an anonymous Twitter account ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Brown V Tasmania
''Brown v Tasmania'',. was a significant Australian court case, decided in the High Court of Australia on 18 October 2017. The case was an important decision about the implied freedom of political communication in the Australian Constitution in which the majority held that provisions of the Tasmanian ''Protesters Act''. were invalid as a burden on the implied freedom of political communication in a way that was not reasonably appropriate and adapted, or proportionate, to the legitimate purpose of protecting businesses and their operations. Background In 2014 there was a change of government in Tasmania, under Liberal Premier Will Hodgman. Their pre-election legislative agenda included "rebuilding the forest industry" by "cracking down on illegal and dangerous protests in our forests". The purpose of the Protestors Act was to implement that policy and was intended to send a message to protest groups that intentionally disruptive protest action that prevents or hinders lawful bus ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Legal Tests
In law, a test is a commonly applied method of evaluation used to resolve matters of jurisprudence. In the context of a trial, a hearing, discovery, or other kinds of legal proceedings, the resolution of certain questions of fact or law may hinge on the application of one or more legal tests. Tests are often formulated from the logical analysis of a judicial decision or a court order where it appears that a finder of fact or the court made a particular decision after contemplating a well-defined set of circumstances. It is assumed that evaluating any given set of circumstances under a legal test will lead to an unambiguous and repeatable result. Kinds of legal tests * Bright-line rule * Balancing test International law *Berne three-step test * Habitual residence test * ''Caroline'' test Common law * "But-for" test Canada * ''Andrews'' test * Air of reality test (see alsR v Fontaine * Assumed Jurisdiction test *Central management and control test * ''Collins'' Test *Commu ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Viewpoint Discrimination
Viewpoint discrimination is a concept in United States jurisprudence related to the First Amendment First or 1st is the ordinal form of the number one (#1). First or 1st may also refer to: *World record, specifically the first instance of a particular achievement Arts and media Music * 1$T, American rapper, singer-songwriter, DJ, and reco ... to the United States Constitution. If a speech act is treated differently by a government entity based on the viewpoint it expresses, this is considered viewpoint discrimination. See also * Cancel culture References First Amendment to the United States Constitution Free speech case law {{US-law-stub ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Viewpoint Neutrality
In United States constitutional law, a forum is a property that is open to public expression and assembly. Types Forums are classified as public or nonpublic. Public forum A public forum also called an ''open forum'', is open to all expression that is protected under the First Amendment. Streets, parks, and sidewalks are considered open to public discourse by tradition and are designated as ''traditional public forums''. The government creates a ''designated public forum'' when it intentionally opens a nontraditional forum for public discourse''. Limited public forums'', such as municipal meeting rooms, are nonpublic forums that have been specifically designated by the government as open to certain groups or topics. Traditional public forums cannot be changed to nonpublic forums by governments. The use of public forums generally cannot be restricted based on the content of the speech expressed by the user. Use can be restricted based on content, however, if the restriction passe ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Solicitor-General Of Victoria
The Solicitor-General of Victoria, known informally as the Solicitor-General, is the state's Second Law Officer and the deputy of the Attorney-General. The Solicitor-General acts alongside the Crown Advocate and Crown Solicitor, and serves as one of the legal and constitutional advisers of the Crown and its government in the Australian state of Victoria. The Solicitor-General is addressed in court as "Mr/Ms Solicitor". Despite the title, the position may only be filled by a barrister admitted serving as Senior Counsel, for a period specific by the Governor of Victoria. The inaugural Solicitor-General was Redmond Barry, who serviced from 15 July 1851 to 18 January 1852. The current Solicitor-General is Rowena Orr . History and function Formerly, they were elected members of parliament, but have not been so since the early/mid twentieth century. s2(1) "As on and from the commencement of this Act the office of Solicitor-General shall not be held by a responsible Minister of the Cr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Responsible Government
Responsible government is a conception of a system of government that embodies the principle of parliamentary accountability, the foundation of the Westminster system of parliamentary democracy. Governments (the equivalent of the executive branch) in Westminster democracies are responsible to parliament rather than to the monarch, or, in a colonial context, to the imperial government, and in a republican context, to the president, either in full or in part. If the parliament is bicameral, then the government is responsible first to the parliament's lower house, which is more representative than the upper house, as it usually has more members and they are always directly elected. Responsible government of parliamentary accountability manifests itself in several ways. Ministers account to Parliament for their decisions and for the performance of their departments. This requirement to make announcements and to answer questions in Parliament means that ministers must have the priv ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
