| dbo:abstract
|
- Animal Defenders International v United Kingdom [2013] ECHR 362 is United Kingdom constitutional law and a UK, European and international human rights case, on political spending at elections. It held that the United Kingdom's ban on spending money on political advertising, under the Communications Act 2003 section 321(2), was fully compatible with freedom of expression under the ECHR article 10. While reflecting most of the election laws in the democratic world, the case stands in heavy contrast to Buckley v. Valeo and Citizens United v. FEC, as decided by majorities of the US Supreme Court, as well as Australian Capital Television v Commonwealth as decided by the majority of the High Court of Australia. (en)
|
| dbo:thumbnail
| |
| dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 12512 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:caption
|
- "My mate's a primate" (en)
|
| dbp:citations
|
- [2013] ECHR 362, 57 EHRR 21 (en)
|
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:keywords
|
- Freedom of expression, money, equality (en)
|
| dbp:name
|
- Animal Defenders Int v UK (en)
|
| dbp:priorActions
|
- R v Secretary of State for Culture Media and Sport [2006] EWHC 3069, [2008] UKHL 15 and [2011] ECHR 191 (en)
|
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- Animal Defenders International v United Kingdom [2013] ECHR 362 is United Kingdom constitutional law and a UK, European and international human rights case, on political spending at elections. It held that the United Kingdom's ban on spending money on political advertising, under the Communications Act 2003 section 321(2), was fully compatible with freedom of expression under the ECHR article 10. (en)
|
| rdfs:label
|
- Animal Defenders International v United Kingdom (en)
|
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is dbo:wikiPageRedirects
of | |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
