Conviction for publishing an obscene libel (abortion manual) overturned.
(1878) 3 QBD 607
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Bradlaugh v The Queen 1877
Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs Annie Besant were prosecuted for publishing a treatise on contraceptive methods entitled the Fruits of Philosophy which had originally been published in the United States of America in 1832. They were prosecuted for . .
Cited by:
Appealed to – Bradlaugh v The Queen 1877
Charles Bradlaugh and Mrs Annie Besant were prosecuted for publishing a treatise on contraceptive methods entitled the Fruits of Philosophy which had originally been published in the United States of America in 1832. They were prosecuted for . .
Cited – Regina (Smeaton) v Secretary of State for Health and Others Admn 18-Apr-2002
The claimant challenged the Order as regards the prescription of the morning-after pill, asserting that the pill would cause miscarriages, and that therefore the use would be an offence under the 1861 Act.
Held: ‘SPUC’s case is that any . .
Cited – In Re Besant ChD 18-May-1878
Mrs Besant had been prosecuted for publishing an obscene libel in the form of a book on abortion.
Held: The publication of the book was in itself sufficient grounds for removing Mrs Besant’s seven year old daughter from her mother’s custody. . .
Cited – Sutherland v Stopes HL 1925
Dr Marie Stopes failed in her attempt to reverse the verdict against her in libel proceedings she had brought in relation to a book which criticised what it called her ‘monstrous campaign of birth control’ and opined, looking back to the events of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 16 October 2021; Ref: scu.223707 br>