Search for: "INFORRM"
Results 541 - 560
of 950
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
2 Dec 2018, 4:28 pm
There was a comment on these changes from Iain Wilson on Inforrm and a piece in the Sunday Times. [read post]
21 Feb 2012, 3:26 am
After forty days of module one, the Leveson Inquiry is taking a short break before the second module into the relationship between the press and the police begins on February 27. [read post]
3 Nov 2019, 4:17 pm
The Press Gazette has coverage as does INFORRM. [read post]
18 Oct 2015, 9:32 am
In our Inforrm case comment, we described this as a “landmark decision on the quantum of privacy damages“. [read post]
28 Apr 2011, 10:40 pm
discussion on the history and future of privacy law from Inforrm’s Blog. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 5:39 am
I am obliged therefore to do so by means of further Inforrm articles of which this is the first. [read post]
18 Mar 2018, 5:08 pm
Northern Ireland On Inforrm Olivia O’Kane had a Round Up of Northern Ireland Decisions in 2017 in libel privacy and media law. [read post]
8 Nov 2020, 4:06 pm
There was an Inforrm post dealing with the media coverage and an Inforrm case comment. [read post]
24 Jun 2018, 4:41 pm
We also had an Inforrm case comment on the decision. [read post]
20 Feb 2017, 4:29 pm
The purpose of this update is to correct, clarify and comment on media reports of family court cases, to explain and comment on published Judgments of family cases and to highlight other transparency news. [read post]
11 Feb 2018, 4:57 pm
Inforrm had a post about the acquisition. [read post]
14 Nov 2021, 4:21 pm
Brian Cathcart summarised Day 1, Day 2 and Day 3 of the hearing for Inforrm. [read post]
7 Feb 2021, 4:53 pm
We had an Inforrm post and there was a piece on the Press Gazette. [read post]
6 Nov 2018, 8:41 am
Lachaux v Independent Print, Supreme Court to hear “serious harm” appeal On Tuesday and Wednesday 13 and 14 November 2018, the Supreme Court (Lords Kerr, Wilson, Sumption, Hodge and Briggs) will hear the appeal in Lachaux v Independent Print Limited & Anor UKSC 2017/0175, against the Court of Appeal decision of Davis LJ, with whom MacFarlane and Sharp LJJ concurred ([2017] EWCA Civ 1334). [read post]
11 Mar 2020, 5:43 pm
Inforrm reported on the trial in a case comment found here. [read post]
19 Apr 2020, 4:12 pm
We also had an Inforrm post. [read post]
15 Mar 2020, 5:36 pm
There was an post on Inforrm. [read post]
7 Dec 2015, 12:35 am
He wrote an article for Inforrm criticising the changes here. [read post]
6 Feb 2022, 4:18 pm
Inforrm celebrated its twelfth birthday this week. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 5:08 am
The key points in Sir Brian’s letter are set out in a news update on Inforrm’s blog, as follows: That, since Part 1 of the Inquiry, it had been revealed that phone hacking was more widespread than was then disclosed [and] that the evidence given to Part 1 was “far from complete”, so that it “remains unclear exactly how widespread these and similar practices have been throughout the print media”. [read post]
