Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/2440/76845
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Ambrose, W. | - |
dc.date.issued | 2012 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Adelaide Law Review, 2012; 33(1):281-285 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0065-1915 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/2440/76845 | - |
dc.description.abstract | In Wotton v Queensland the High Court ('Court') considered whether restrictions on a parolee's ability to attend public meetings and engage with the media breached the implied freedom of political communication. This case note will examine whether the Court's approach in Wotton was consistent with the underlying basis of the implied freedom by examining its application to executive bodies, the requirement that the law burden political communication and the treatment of state based political communication. | - |
dc.description.statementofresponsibility | Warwick Ambrose | - |
dc.description.uri | http://www.law.adelaide.edu.au/review/issues/ | - |
dc.language.iso | en | - |
dc.publisher | Adelaide Law Review Association | - |
dc.rights | Copyright © 2012 The University of Adelaide | - |
dc.title | Wotton v Queensland (2012) 285 ALR 1 | - |
dc.type | Journal article | - |
pubs.publication-status | Published | - |
Appears in Collections: | Aurora harvest Law publications |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.