About: Clubb v Edwards

An Entity of Type: Thing, from Named Graph: http://dbpedia.org, within Data Space: dbpedia.org

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.

thumbnail
Property Value
dbo:abstract
  • 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. (en)
dbo:thumbnail
dbo:wikiPageID
  • 64674811 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageLength
  • 16968 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
  • 1100308036 (xsd:integer)
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbp:court
dbp:dateDecided
  • 2019-04-10 (xsd:date)
dbp:fullName
  • Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery (en)
dbp:judges
dbp:name
  • Clubb v Edwards (en)
dbp:opinions
  • (en)
  • concurring (en)
  • appeal dismissed (en)
  • Neither Act found to be in breach of the constitutional freedom of political communication (en)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dcterms:subject
rdfs:comment
  • 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. (en)
rdfs:label
  • Clubb v Edwards (en)
owl:sameAs
prov:wasDerivedFrom
foaf:depiction
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink of
is foaf:primaryTopic of
Powered by OpenLink Virtuoso    This material is Open Knowledge     W3C Semantic Web Technology     This material is Open Knowledge    Valid XHTML + RDFa
This content was extracted from Wikipedia and is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License