Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Australian defamation law is defined through a combination of common law and statutory law. Between 2014 and 2018, Australia earned the title of “world defamation capital”, recording 10 times as many libel claims as the UK on a per-capita basis. [1] Australia's common law is nationally uniform, and so principles and remedies for defamation ...
Certain subject-matter in Australia is subject to various forms of government censorship. These include matters of national security, judicial non-publication or suppression orders, defamation law, the federal Racial Discrimination Act 1975, film and literature (including video game) classification, and advertising restrictions.
Internet censorship in Australia is enforced by both the country's criminal law [1] [2] as well as voluntarily enacted by internet service providers. [ 3 ] [ 4 ] The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has the power to enforce content restrictions on Internet content hosted within Australia, and maintain a blocklist of overseas ...
Australian Capital Television v Commonwealth, [1] is a decision of the High Court of Australia. The case is notable in Australian Constitutional Law as one of the first cases within Australia's implied freedom of political communication jurisprudence.
Some common law jurisdictions distinguish between spoken defamation, called slander, and defamation in other media such as printed words or images, called libel. [26] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting ...
Claims made in the film that some Aboriginal Australians in the outback were actually neanderthals were also deemed by the Australian government to be harmful to ongoing anthropological research. After its 1947 re-screening the film went missing. A full print of the film was later discovered and made commercially available on DVD in 2010.
Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation [1] is a High Court of Australia case that upheld the existence of an implied freedom of political communication in the Australian Constitution, but found that it did not necessarily provide a defence to a defamation action.
The hate speech laws in Australia give redress to someone who is the victim of discrimination, vilification or injury on grounds that differ from one jurisdiction to another. All Australian jurisdictions give redress when a person is victimised on account of skin colour , ethnicity , national origin or race .