Search for: "Nichols v. English"
Results 1 - 20
of 75
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jun 2024, 4:20 pm
Merely seven months earlier, in Wainwright v Home Office [2003] UKHL 53, [2004] 2 AC 406, the House of Lords had rejected an invitation to recognise a general invasion of privacy action in English law. [read post]
One of the Stiffest Charges Against Jan. 6 Insurrectionists Hangs on by a Thread in the D.C. Circuit
11 Apr 2023, 5:01 am
Although the dissenting opinion cites Bond v. [read post]
17 Jan 2023, 9:03 pm
Nichols that public school districts receiving federal funds must provide supplemental language instruction to non-English-speaking students. [read post]
2 Feb 2022, 4:00 am
Bhasin v. [read post]
14 Apr 2021, 4:07 pm
Over-vigorous application of a statutory offence might be greeted in similar terms to those employed by the Lord Chief Justice in the Twitter Joke Trial case (Chambers v DPP), an appeal from conviction under s.127 of the Communications Act 2003: “The 2003 Act did not create some newly minted interference with the first of President Roosevelt’s essential freedoms – freedom of speech and expression. [read post]
6 Apr 2021, 12:43 am
Over-vigorous application of a statutory offence might be greeted in similar terms to those employed by the Lord Chief Justice in the Twitter Joke Trial case (Chambers v DPP), an appeal from conviction under s.127 of the Communications Act 2003:“The 2003 Act did not create some newly minted interference with the first of President Roosevelt's essential freedoms – freedom of speech and expression. [read post]
26 Feb 2021, 2:54 pm
Footnote: See Pabon v. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 4:09 pm
“Likely” in this context normally means “more likely than not”, though a lesser prospect of success may suffice where the Court needs a short time to consider evidence/argument, or where the adverse consequences of publication might be extremely serious: Cream Holdings Ltd v Banerjee [2005] 1 AC 253 [16]-[23] (Lord Nicholls); ABC v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2329 [2019] EMLR 5 [16]. [read post]
23 Sep 2018, 4:03 pm
Steel Corp. v. [read post]
21 Sep 2018, 6:10 am
Daniel O’Connor, Daniel V. [read post]
29 May 2018, 4:05 pm
The Oxford English Dictionary definition of ‘must’ is: Be obliged to; should (expressing necessity): e.g. [read post]
18 May 2018, 8:11 am
The Court of Appeal distinguished the principles in Foakes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605 and in re Selectmove [1995] 1 WLR 474 and instead followed Williams v Roffey Bros & Nicholls (Contractors) Ltd [1991] 1 QB 1. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 4:00 am
More recently, in Re Nichol [2017] QSC 220, another judge of the Queensland court held that a will contained in an unsent text message on the phone of the deceased could be enforced. [read post]
18 Sep 2017, 1:36 am
The first Zurich IP Retreat was held on Friday/Saturday 8/9 September 2017 on the shores of lake Zurich, organized by INGRES and ETH Zurich, in honour of Dr. [read post]
9 Aug 2017, 9:09 pm
Nichols v. [read post]
19 May 2016, 3:22 am
” On this basis, and for various other reasons, the Court of Appeal concluded that the Claimant was not “likely” to obtain a final injunction at trial in accordance with the test set out in section 12 of the Human Rights Act 1998 (“HRA”) and the judgment of Lord Nicholls in Cream Holdings v Banerjee ([2005] 1 AC 253), and therefore lifted the injunction that it had previously granted. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 3:01 am
Link to part 1- http://ukscblog.com/new-judgment-jetivia-sa-anor-v-bilta-uk-ltd-ors-2015-uksc-23-part-1/ [read post]
11 Mar 2016, 7:55 am
Idea/expression dichotomy: Nichols/Learned Hand abstraction test. [read post]
27 Jan 2016, 4:32 pm
For example, in Campbell v MGN Ltd [2004] UKHL 22, Lord Nicholls held that the wrongful disclosure of private information is just ‘one aspect of invasion of privacy’. [read post]
23 Dec 2015, 8:00 am
O’Keefe v Caldwell (1949) Argus Law Reports 381. [read post]
