Search for: "People v Campbell" Results 381 - 400 of 702
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 May 2016, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
Davies doorstepped convicted fraudster Neelam Desai once and sent her two emails over claims she had conned people out of thousands of pounds. [read post]
30 May 2014, 6:31 am by John Elwood
  Campbell-Ponstingle v. [read post]
1 Dec 2022, 6:43 am by Rebecca Tushnet
” MGFB submitted evidence of confusion, e.g., a musician who often performed at the Lounge said multiple people asked her about the series “and if [she] had met any of the people on the television show. [read post]
9 Sep 2018, 4:38 pm by INFORRM
The adage that “a picture tells a thousand words” (as noted in Campbell v MGN, Theakston v MGN and in von Hannover v Germany) remains a key consideration. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 3:57 am by INFORRM
But, under reference to the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Karakó v Hungary (Application No 39311/05) (unreported), given 28 April 2009, he submitted that article 8 does not confer a right to have your reputation protected from being affected by what other people say. [read post]
6 Nov 2016, 4:14 pm by INFORRM
  Hysteria broke out across the Europhobic tabloid press with the judges being dubbed “the enemies of the people”. [read post]
11 Mar 2011, 4:03 pm by INFORRM
The decision in Sinnott illustrates that in Irish law, no less that in England (Theakston v MGN [2002] EWHC 137 (QB) (14 February 2002); Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 AC 457, [2004] UKHL 22 (6 May 2004)) and under the European Convention on Human Rights (Peck v UK 44647/98, (2003) 36 EHRR 719, [2003] ECHR 44 (28 January 2003); von Hannover v Germany 59320/00, (2005) 40 EHRR 1, [2004] ECHR 294 (24 June 2004)), it is no longer an answer (if it ever was) simply to… [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 9:02 pm by Edward A. Fallone
(Jud Campbell, “Natural Rights and the First Amendment,” 127 YALE L.J. 246, 252-253 (2017)). [read post]
9 May 2024, 7:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 A school district’s discretion to remove material from its collection, however, must be exercised within “fundamental constitutional safeguards” (Campbell v St. [read post]
9 May 2024, 7:00 am by Public Employment Law Press
 A school district’s discretion to remove material from its collection, however, must be exercised within “fundamental constitutional safeguards” (Campbell v St. [read post]
1 Aug 2018, 4:42 pm by INFORRM
This critique follows on from my previous post, in which I responded to Paul Wragg’s criticism of the manner in which the judge in Richard v BBC dealt with the first stage of the claim – whether Richard had a “reasonable expectation of privacy” in respect of the information broadcast about him. [read post]