levo

Human Rights: Restrictions

Obscenity and the arguments for and against restriction

  • 1 thing to know
  • A2 Units 3 and 4

Overview

Defence of public good and problem of definition in obscenity law.

What you need to know

Answer each one before you reveal it.

Your recallNot started
Key term

Explain the problem of definition in obscenity law.

Questions from this subtopic

Each one with the model answer underneath.

  1. 1

    State the test of obscenity under the Obscene Publications Act 1959.

    Model answer

    An article is obscene if its effect, taken as a whole, is such as to tend to deprave and corrupt the persons who are likely, in all the circumstances, to read, see or hear it.

  2. 2

    What offence does section 2 of the Obscene Publications Act 1959 create?

    Model answer

    Publishing an obscene article, or having an obscene article in one's possession for publication for gain.

  3. 3

    How did the 1959 Act change the earlier common law test of obscenity?

    Model answer

    The old test allowed a work to be condemned on isolated passages and judged by their effect on those most open to immoral influence, whereas the Act requires the article to be judged as a whole and by reference to its likely audience.

  4. 4

    What is the defence of public good?

    Model answer

    Section 4 provides a defence where publication is justified as being for the public good on the ground that it is in the interests of science, literature, art or learning, or of other objects of general concern.

  5. 5

    What evidence may be called on the defence of public good?

    Model answer

    Expert evidence about the literary, artistic, scientific or other merits of the article is admissible, which is unusual because expert opinion is not admitted on the question of obscenity itself.

  6. 6

    Explain the problem of definition in obscenity law.

    Model answer

    Depravity and corruption are nowhere defined, so a jury applies its own standards, and identical material may be condemned by one jury and acquitted by another.

Other ways to work this

The same content, four other ways.

What is inside Levo

Six ways to work the same material.

1Closed book
2Open book
3Closed book

The 3-step method, run for you

Answer cold, learn it, then prove it stuck. Levo tracks the jump between your first attempt and your last.

Law Making in Wales and the UK
Delegated Legislation
Statutory Interpretation
Judicial Precedent

Cram a whole paper in one sitting

Sort every topic into what you know and what you do not, then drill only the weak ones.

Roles v Nathan ( ).
196319411945

Blank Blitz makes facts automatic

Rapid timed gap-fills on the terms and numbers you need to recall without thinking.

AThe defendant owed the victim a duty of care and breached it.
BThe breach carried a reasonably foreseeable risk of death.
CThe breach caused the death.

Build It gets the exam shape right

Assemble a full-mark answer from its marking points, in the order an examiner wants them.

Pecuniary loss is financial and measurable.
TrueFalse

Test It catches misconceptions

Spot the fault in a statement. The traps are the mistakes students actually make.

721941163128510

Brain Breaks between sessions

Short focus games to reset attention, so the next set lands better than the last.

Every question in Human Rights: Restrictions, on a schedule.

Attempt a question from memory, write the correct version, then attempt it again. Levo records the jump between your first attempt and your last, and brings each question back on the day you are due to forget it.

Or £46 a year, about £3.83 a month. Cancel anytime.