Search for: "Skelton v. Action" Results 1 - 20 of 30
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jul 2022, 12:45 am by INFORRM
Even if it had been, Stadler illustrates that it would be difficult to establish an actionable loss. [read post]
21 Jul 2022, 4:44 pm by INFORRM
In an action for damages for the breach, Saini J held that, for there to be a misuse of private information, there must be a misuse – an action or interference – by the defendant. [read post]
5 Sep 2021, 10:56 am by Giles Peaker
 Brent London Borough Council v Shulem B Association Ltd (2011) EWHC 1663 (Ch), (2011) 1 WLR 3014, and Skelton v DBS Homes (Kings Hill) Ltd (2017) EWCA Civ 1139, (2018) 1 WLR 362 both found the necessity of a valid demand for payment. [read post]
24 Jun 2021, 10:09 am by Edward T. Kang
The semantic distinction between malfeasance, misfeasance, and nonfeasance and its impact on pleading standards was discussed extensively in Skelton v. [read post]
11 Aug 2020, 1:15 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Mr Skelton was sent to jail for 8 years for his criminal actions and Morrisons spent over £2m cleaning up the breach. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 1:02 am by Jani Ihalainen
Morrisons took action to remove the data from the website, and Morrisons was then sued by the Respondents (a collective of various employees) alleging vicarious liability for Mr Skelton's actions and the data breach. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 1:02 am by Jani Ihalainen
Morrisons took action to remove the data from the website, and Morrisons was then sued by the Respondents (a collective of various employees) alleging vicarious liability for Mr Skelton's actions and the data breach. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 1:02 am by Jani Ihalainen
Morrisons took action to remove the data from the website, and Morrisons was then sued by the Respondents (a collective of various employees) alleging vicarious liability for Mr Skelton's actions and the data breach. [read post]
20 Apr 2020, 1:02 am by Jani Ihalainen
Morrisons took action to remove the data from the website, and Morrisons was then sued by the Respondents (a collective of various employees) alleging vicarious liability for Mr Skelton's actions and the data breach. [read post]
29 Mar 2020, 4:49 pm by INFORRM
Newspapers Journalism and Regulation The Press Gazette had a piece “Marketers urged to ‘back don’t block British journalism’ as Covid-19 hits online advertising” IPSO IPSO has published a number of rulings and resolutions statements since our last Round Up: 08645-19 A Man v The Sunday Times, 1 Accuracy (2019), 2 Privacy (2019), 6 Children (2019), no breach- after investigation 07416-19 Englefield Estate v readingchronicle.co.uk, 1 Accuracy (2019),… [read post]
20 Nov 2018, 4:54 pm by INFORRM
  His actions in leaking the employee data were therefore an act of retribution designed to cause damage to Morrisons. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 3:01 am by INFORRM
In a judgment handed down today (Various Claimants v Wm Morrisons Supermarket plc [2017] EWHC 3113 (QB))[pdf] the judge held that the defendant supermarket was vicariously liable for Mr Skelton’s data breach. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 2:22 pm by Robert B. Milligan
While the circuit court split continues to widen regarding the interpretation of unauthorized access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the recent decision in U.S. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 2:22 pm by Robert B. Milligan
While the circuit court split continues to widen regarding the interpretation of unauthorized access under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the recent decision in U.S. v. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 9:26 am by Robert B. Milligan
Although FINRA allows a former employer to initially file an injunction action before both the Court and FINRA, FINRA—not the Court—will ultimately decide whether to enter a permanent injunction and/or whether the former employer is entitled to damages as a result of the former employee’s illegal conduct. [read post]