This HTML5 document contains 55 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/
n15http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/1957/
n16https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
freebasehttp://rdf.freebase.com/ns/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
goldhttp://purl.org/linguistics/gold/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Switzman_v_Elbling
rdf:type
dbo:Place
rdfs:label
Switzman v Elbling
rdfs:comment
Switzman v Elbling and A.G. of Quebec, [1957] SCR 285 is a Supreme Court of Canada decision in which the Court ruled that Quebec's Act to Protect the Province Against Communistic Propaganda, commonly known as the "Padlock Law", was ultra vires of the provincial legislature. The Court held that the Padlock Law was a statute respecting criminal law, which is the exclusive authority of the Parliament of Canada under the British North America Act, 1867. Rand, Kellock, and Abbott JJ further held that the law was ultra vires because it violated freedom of expression guaranteed under an implied bill of rights springing from the "democratic form of government established in Canada", but this view was not shared by the rest of the majority.
dcterms:subject
dbc:Canadian_freedom_of_expression_case_law dbc:Canadian_federalism_case_law dbc:Censorship_in_Canada dbc:1957_in_Canadian_case_law dbc:Supreme_Court_of_Canada_case_articles_without_infoboxes dbc:Supreme_Court_of_Canada_cases
dbo:wikiPageID
3310034
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1064107764
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbr:Freedom_of_expression dbc:Canadian_freedom_of_expression_case_law dbr:Implied_Bill_of_Rights dbr:Ultra_vires dbr:Quebec dbc:Canadian_federalism_case_law dbr:Marxist dbr:Parliament_of_Canada dbc:1957_in_Canadian_case_law dbc:Censorship_in_Canada dbc:Supreme_Court_of_Canada_cases dbr:Assignment_(law) dbr:Padlock_Law dbc:Supreme_Court_of_Canada_case_articles_without_infoboxes dbr:Constitution_Act,_1867 dbr:Attorney_General_of_Quebec dbr:National_Assembly_of_Quebec dbr:Criminal_law dbr:Supreme_Court_of_Canada
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n15:1957scc10001.html
owl:sameAs
wikidata:Q7659192 freebase:m.094v8k n16:4vo6N
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Infobox_SCC dbt:Canada-law-stub dbt:Reflist dbt:Italic_title
dbp:dissent
Taschereau J
dbp:docket
8263
dbp:joinmajority
Rand, Kellock and Abbott JJ
dbp:lawsapplied
s.91-92 British North America Act, 1867
dbp:citations
[1957] SCR 285
dbp:majority
Kerwin CJ and Locke, Cartwright, Fauteux and Nolan JJ
dbo:abstract
Switzman v Elbling and A.G. of Quebec, [1957] SCR 285 is a Supreme Court of Canada decision in which the Court ruled that Quebec's Act to Protect the Province Against Communistic Propaganda, commonly known as the "Padlock Law", was ultra vires of the provincial legislature. The Court held that the Padlock Law was a statute respecting criminal law, which is the exclusive authority of the Parliament of Canada under the British North America Act, 1867. Rand, Kellock, and Abbott JJ further held that the law was ultra vires because it violated freedom of expression guaranteed under an implied bill of rights springing from the "democratic form of government established in Canada", but this view was not shared by the rest of the majority.
dbp:caseName
Switzman v Elbling and A.G. of Quebec
dbp:decidedDate
1957-03-08
dbp:fullCaseName
John Switzman v Freda Elbling and the Attorney-General of the Province of Quebec
dbp:heardDate
0001-11-07
dbp:ruling
The Act to Protect the Province Against Communistic Propagand is ultra vires of the provincial legislature
dbp:scc
1954
gold:hypernym
dbr:Court
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Switzman_v_Elbling?oldid=1064107764&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
4278
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Switzman_v_Elbling