Search for: "In re Opinion of the Judges v Nichols"
Results 41 - 60
of 67
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Feb 2011, 3:29 am
(TTABlog) Test your TTAB judge-ability: Is “MONSTER” merely descriptive of automotive accessories? [read post]
3 Dec 2010, 12:21 am
Lord Phillips also re-named the defence as “honest comment” (as opposed to Court of Appeal in BCA v Singh [2010] EWCA Civ 350, which favoured “honest opinion” [35]) and called on the Law Commission to consider and review the present state of the defence. [read post]
1 Dec 2010, 4:35 pm
As a result, Lord Phillips re-wrote Lord Nicholls’ the fourth proposition to read: “.. [read post]
20 Nov 2010, 2:01 am
Yet the “comment” defence requires – and is likely to continue to require – that what is published must be “recognisable as comment” or, since the Court of Appeal held that the defence should be re-named as “honest opinion”, “recognisable as opinion”. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 3:57 am
In that context, it has been held that “the values enshrined in Articles 8 and 10 are now part of the cause of action for breach of confidence” (See Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] 2 AC 457 at [17] (Lord Nicholls) and that it is necessary to consider Strasbourg jurisprudence to establish the scope of that domestic cause of action, since those Articles are now “not merely of persuasive or parallel effect” but are “the very content of… [read post]
1 Oct 2010, 7:17 am
In particular, the explanation at [4] of the way in which the rights protected by Articles 8 and 10 have been absorbed into the long-established action for breach of confidence was approved by Lord Nicholls in Campbell v. [read post]
27 Sep 2010, 8:05 pm
In all other respects Flood upheld and applied the principles set out by the House of Lords in Reynolds v The Times and Jameel v Wall Street Journal. [read post]
24 Jul 2010, 10:04 am
Pill LJ pointed out that, in an analysis of the law of fair comment in the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal case of Tse Wai Chun Pau v Albert Cheng ([2001] EMLR 31), Lord Nicholls had said “the comment must explicitly or implicitly indicate, at least in general terms, what are the facts on which the comment is being made. [read post]
19 Jul 2010, 1:05 am
Clause 2 re-names the defence of fair comment “honest opinion” but, as everyone knows, the defence had already been re-baptised by no less than the Lord Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in the Simon Singh case ([2010] EWCA Civ 350). [read post]
17 Jul 2010, 2:11 am
’ ([2001] 2 AC 127, at 206 per Lord Nicholls). [read post]
12 Jul 2010, 1:10 am
[O-III1-4] Two judges dissented from the overall approach of the majority. [read post]
28 Jun 2010, 1:13 am
Reputation, as Lord Nicholls explained in Reynolds v Times Newspapers, does matter, and not merely for its service to the individual concerned: ‘Reputation is an integral and important part of the dignity of the individual. [read post]
23 Jun 2010, 1:30 am
The issue of “balance” was considered by several of the judges in the Grand Chamber case of Lindon, Otchakovsky-Laurens and July v. [read post]
14 Apr 2010, 2:13 pm
We’re releasing these as we get ready to submit a big filing in the FCC’s “Future of Media” proceeding (deadline is May 7th). [read post]
17 Feb 2010, 5:22 am
El Camino Res., LTD. v. [read post]
25 Nov 2009, 3:00 am
Ltd v Underworks Ptd. [read post]
18 Aug 2009, 3:46 pm
Stern v. [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 6:37 am
He's a veteran of such battles as Hexion v. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 7:43 pm
Strine notes that Unocal’s board met for eight or nine hours to consider Pickens’ offer — a response to Smith v. [read post]
27 Jun 2008, 5:40 pm
Wagler, et al (NFP), a 30-page opinion, Judge Kirsch's dissent begins:Multiple motions. [read post]
