This HTML5 document contains 87 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n14https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n12http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FilePath/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Comcare_v_Banerji
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Clubb_v_Edwards
Subject Item
dbr:Clubb_v_Edwards
rdfs:label
Clubb v Edwards
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.
dbp:name
Clubb v Edwards
foaf:depiction
n12:Coat_of_Arms_of_Australia.svg
dcterms:subject
dbc:High_Court_of_Australia_cases dbc:2019_in_Australian_law dbc:2019_in_case_law dbc:Australian_constitutional_law dbc:Abortion_case_law dbc:Rights_in_the_Australian_Constitution_cases
dbo:wikiPageID
64674811
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1100308036
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:High_Court_of_Australia dbr:Foetus dbc:2019_in_Australian_law dbc:2019_in_case_law dbr:Responsible_government dbr:Unconstitutional dbr:Judiciary_of_Australia dbr:Chief_Justice_of_Australia dbr:Susan_Kiefel dbr:Viewpoint_discrimination dbr:Hill_v._Colorado dbc:High_Court_of_Australia_cases dbr:Stephen_Gageler dbr:Michelle_Gordon dbr:Viewpoint_neutrality dbr:First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution dbr:Comcare_v_Banerji dbr:Martyn_Iles dbc:Australian_constitutional_law dbr:Lange_v_Australian_Broadcasting_Corporation dbr:Solicitor-General_of_Victoria dbr:McCloy_v_New_South_Wales dbr:Patrick_Keane_(justice) dbr:Magistrates'_Court_of_Victoria dbr:Brown_v_Tasmania dbr:Virginia_Bell_(judge) dbr:Australian_constitutional_law dbr:Schenck_v._Pro-Choice_Network_of_Western_New_York dbr:Placard dbr:Adrienne_Stone dbr:National_Institute_of_Family_and_Life_Advocates_v._Becerra dbr:Magistrates_Court_of_Tasmania dbr:Justices dbc:Rights_in_the_Australian_Constitution_cases dbr:Geoffrey_Nettle dbr:Plurality_opinion dbr:Proportionality_(law) dbr:James_Edelman dbc:Abortion_case_law dbr:Legal_tests dbr:Australian_Christian_Lobby
owl:sameAs
n14:Cnj67 wikidata:Q97855880
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Implied_freedom_of_political_communication_cases dbt:Use_Australian_English dbt:Short_description dbt:Use_dmy_dates dbt:Cite_AustLII dbt:Infobox_court_case dbt:Reflist dbt:Hsp
dbo:thumbnail
n12:Coat_of_Arms_of_Australia.svg?width=300
dbp:court
dbr:High_Court_of_Australia
dbp:fullName
Clubb v Edwards; Preston v Avery
dbp:judges
dbr:Justices dbr:Chief_Justice_of_Australia dbr:Stephen_Gageler dbr:Patrick_Keane_(justice) dbr:Michelle_Gordon dbr:Virginia_Bell_(judge) dbr:Susan_Kiefel dbr:James_Edelman dbr:Geoffrey_Nettle
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.
dbp:dateDecided
2019-04-10
dbp:opinions
concurring Neither Act found to be in breach of the constitutional freedom of political communication appeal dismissed
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Clubb_v_Edwards?oldid=1100308036&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
16968
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Clubb_v_Edwards
Subject Item
dbr:Abortion_law
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Clubb_v_Edwards
Subject Item
wikipedia-en:Clubb_v_Edwards
foaf:primaryTopic
dbr:Clubb_v_Edwards