Talk:Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth

Lange
"The case was one of the earliest in a series of cases in which the High Court found implied rights in the Constitution. This trend reached a high-point in Theophanous v Herald and Weekly Times Ltd, which found that the implied right to freedom of political communication could be used as a defence in a defamation action. Although that is no longer the case, the limited right to freedom of communication remains."

Are you sure this is strictly correct? since Lange, you are still allowed a defence of qualified privilege in a defamation action with regard to political matters, even if it is a publication to the world at large. At least, that is my understanding of Lange. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.87.32 (talk • contribs).

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050702062646/http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/1996-97/97rp10.htm to http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/rp/1996-97/97rp10.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:59, 12 July 2017 (UTC)