Search for: "GRANT PERRYMAN"
Results 21 - 40
of 45
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Apr 2010, 11:40 pm
(2) A court may grant leave to a person to bring more than one defamation action in respect of a multiple publication where it considers that the interests of justice so require. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 5:07 pm
That would infringe the rule in Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269. [read post]
18 Apr 2010, 6:00 pm
In English law, final injunctions preventing publication of libels are routinely granted to successful claimants after a trial but interim injunctions are almost unheard of (because of the operation of the rule against prior restraint – the so-called “rule in Bonnard v Perryman). [read post]
31 May 2012, 5:43 pm
The rule in Bonnard v Perryman creates a strong presumption against the granting of an interim injunction to restrain an alleged libel where the defendant intends to plead justification. [read post]
24 Sep 2010, 3:00 am
Perryman, 969 S.W.2d 410, 413 (Tenn. [read post]
26 Jan 2016, 4:35 am
Nothing in the PHA indicates that Parliament intended to encroach on the rule in Bonnard v Perryman”[39]. [read post]
26 Aug 2022, 10:43 am
These are clauses 4 (‘Freedom of speech’), 21 (‘Limit on court’s power to require disclosure of journalistic sources’) and 22 (‘Limit on court’s power to grant relief that affects freedom of expression’). [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 4:52 pm
McCloskey J, delivering the ex tempore judgment, declined to give effect to the rule in Bonnard v Perryman (despite the claim being brought to protect the plaintiff’s reputation). [read post]
2 Aug 2019, 3:45 am
– Persephone Bridgman Baker Libel Injunctions: Time to revisit the rule in Bonnard v Perryman? [read post]
22 Jun 2010, 2:55 am
The judge also considered that on the evidenced before him the action was really about reputation rather than privacy and that the rule in Bonnard v Perryman applied so no injunction would be granted. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 4:52 pm
By this route the rule in Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269, which gives high protection to freedom of expression against prior restraint, could be bypassed. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 1:46 am
This was a case in which the defendant had said he intended to plead justification and the rule in Bonnard v Perryman applied. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 4:23 pm
Sir David Eady considered this point in the context of the “rule in Bonnard v Perryman” in his City University Lecture in March 2010 (see our post here, the lecture is also on the Judiciary website, here). [read post]
25 Nov 2010, 4:08 pm
Obtaining an interim injunction in a defamation case has always been very difficult: if a defendant intends to defend the claim on the basis that what is published is true (or any other substantive defence), the court will not grant an interim injunction (Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269; Holley v Smith [1998] QB 726). [read post]
3 Jul 2011, 7:56 am
The ‘rule in Bonnard v Perryman‘ provides that injunctions are denied in libel if the defendant promises credibly to defend the case at trial. [read post]
14 May 2010, 9:02 am
The court held the defendant would not have been able to justify the defamatory allegations and therefore the judgment would not offend the rule in Bonnard v Perryman. [read post]
8 Aug 2013, 9:36 am
Determining ownership where uncertain increases transaction costs; extent of rights to be granted; terms of deal (how much money, etc.). [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 3:28 am
One of the most bizarre stories of the week concerns a secret tape recording made by actor Hugh Grant of former “News of the World” journalist Paul McMullan boasting of his phone hacking activities in the past. [read post]
8 Sep 2015, 4:22 pm
First, the result of the much criticised but still applicable “Rule in Bonnard v Perryman [read post]
20 Dec 2011, 3:51 am
However on 15 November 2011 Mr Justice Tugendhat granted an injunction permanently closing down the website (see our post here). [read post]
