Case name: Shaw v. DPP [1962] A.C. No. 220 What were the arguments in that case?

In the case of Shaw v. DPP [1962], the main argument was whether the defendant's actions constituted a threat to the public peace and safety. The defendant, Shaw, had been distributing leaflets advocating for the legalization of homosexuality, which was illegal at the time. The prosecution argued that Shaw's actions were likely to incite public disorder and violence, while the defense argued that Shaw was simply exercising his right to freedom of speech and expression. The case raised important questions about the limits of free speech and the balance between individual rights and public safety.

Arguments for the Appellant (Shaw):

- The obscenity law was vague and uncertain.
- It violated the freedom of speech guaranteed by the English Bill of Rights (1689).
- The jury should have been directed to consider the public good when determining obscenity.

Arguments for the Crown (DPP):

- The obscenity law was clear and well-established.
- It was necessary to protect public morals.
- The jury should not consider the public good when determining obscenity.