Search for: "Feltes v. People" Results 541 - 560 of 3,051
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
19 May 2016, 3:22 am by INFORRM
Their Lordships clearly felt that all was not lost for the celebrity couple and that they would still be likely to obtain an injunction at trial to prevent further intrusion, notwithstanding the widespread coverage so far. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 3:54 am by Kirsten Sjvoll, Matrix Chambers
Comment This case is significant for two reasons: First, it tasks the Supreme Court with answering the question raised obiter by Lady Hale in Savage v South Essex NHS Trust [2009] 1 AC 653, namely “what is the extent of the state’s duty to protect all people against an immediate risk of self-harm? [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 4:59 am
Although she is aware the posts are public, and she has around 100 people who follow her, she testified she did not consider the potential impact on S.G. . . .For nearly a full day after these tweets, there was no reaction. [read post]
15 Dec 2008, 6:05 pm
With the IWF, however, not only are the decisions taken behind closed doors, arguably understandable in the light of the sensitivity of the matter under concrn, but so is the implementation.The IWF blocklist is encrypted; arguably so that when it is sent to ISPs, the number of people who can actually read it is minimised. [read post]