Search for: "J. Odell"
Results 21 - 40
of 45
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jul 2023, 4:37 pm
Kinlen J held (at [60]) that the leak amounted to a breach of a duty of care in negligence and to misfeasance of public office. [read post]
18 Dec 2019, 4:08 pm
And, in Murphy v Callinan [2018] IESC 59 (30 November 2018) [36]-[44], Baker J (Clarke CJ and Dunne J concurring) in the Supreme Court approved Feeney J’s analysis in Collins (I will return to this case in a future post). [read post]
10 Nov 2020, 4:06 am
Nicol J’s approach effectively equiparates the two situations. [read post]
23 Jul 2022, 12:45 am
Humphreys J struck out that claim. [read post]
19 Dec 2019, 4:11 pm
His claims failed before MacMenamin J in the High Court and Baker J (Clarke CJ and Dunne J concurring) in the Supreme Court. [read post]
4 Oct 2023, 4:30 pm
In Dyson v Channel Four Television Corporation [2022] EWHC 2718 (KB) (31 October 2022) at first instance, Nicklin J said: 18. [read post]
20 Mar 2011, 8:06 am
However, in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) (16 June 2010), after a thorough review of the authorities, Tugendhat J held that the common law definition of “defamatory” must include a qualification or threshold of seriousness, so as to exclude trivial claims, both as a matter of precedent and to give effect to Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 4:02 pm
Hence, a new section (call it section 2 of the Defamation Act 2017) might provide: (1) Section 31(4) of the Defamation Act 2009 is amended(a) by deleting, in paragraph (j), after “contradiction,”, “and”,(b) by inserting, in paragraph (k), after “finding of defamation”, the following: “, and”, and(c) by inserting, after paragraph (k), the following paragraph: “(j) the levels of general damages awarded in claims for personal… [read post]
29 Sep 2017, 12:44 am
And their views are reinforced by Warby J’s comments. [read post]
16 Nov 2015, 4:35 pm
In Byrne v RTE [2006] 2 ILRM 375,[2006] IEHC 71 (3 March 2006) MacMenamin J referred to Jameel as one of a number of persuasive authorities cited to him in the course of argument. [read post]
10 Mar 2020, 4:36 am
The General Data Protection Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 [the GDPR]) provides both for public enforcement by data protection authorities and for private enforcement by any person who has suffered damage as a result of an infringement of the Regulation (on this inter-connection, see Johanna Chamberlain & Jane Reichel “The Relationship Between Damages and Administrative Fines in the EU General Data Protection… [read post]
15 Dec 2019, 2:52 am
The second case was Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2011] 1 WLR 1985, [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) (16 June 2010) … Tugendhat J held that in addition to the procedural threshold recognised in Jameel, there was a substantive threshold of seriousness to be surmounted before a statement could be regarded as meeting the legal definition of “defamatory”. [read post]
9 May 2017, 4:30 pm
The High Court rejected his application, on the grounds that it was not “clear at first sight that there is beyond argument a case to answer if the matter goes before a criminal court” ([1999] 4 IR 485, [1997] 1 ILRM 432, [1996] IEHC 27 (23 October 1996) [7] (Geoghegan J)). [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 4:59 pm
As to that “content rating and age-gating”, Head 51 provides as follows (on p85 of the pdf of the Heads of the Bill): Head 51 – Online safety guidance materials (1) The Media Commission may issue guidance materials in matters relevant to harmful online content and inappropriate online content.(2) relevant and designated online services shall have regard to these guidance materials in their operations as appropriate.(3) in preparing guidance materials the Media Commission shall have… [read post]
3 May 2016, 10:41 am
However, as Dunne J pointed out in the Supreme Court in that case, the facts … pre-date[d] the enactment of the Defamation Act 2009 which introduced new provisions, inter alia, in relation to damages particularly, in relation to the directions to be given to a jury by the trial judge in respect of a trial in the High Court and the matters to which regard shall be had in assessing damages. [read post]
31 Aug 2020, 12:44 pm
Author: Steven J. [read post]
19 Jun 2007, 7:39 am
J. [read post]
22 Nov 2012, 12:27 am
Mammel, University of the Fraser Valley: The Osoyoos Indian Band, Canadian Wildlife Service, and the Species at Risk Act: Lack of consultation, and perpetuation of underdevelopment on reserves Bryan J. [read post]
15 Dec 2011, 8:24 pm
Kami J. [read post]
6 Apr 2020, 6:00 am
• Donald J. [read post]
