Search for: "INFORRM"
Results 661 - 680
of 889
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
19 Sep 2011, 1:22 am
The police may well be justified in seeking the disclosure, on the grounds that they need to plug the holes (see Brian Cathcart on Inforrm’s Blog for a post from their perspective). [read post]
8 Feb 2015, 4:23 pm
Please let Inforrm know: inforrmeditorial@gmail.com. [read post]
24 Jul 2011, 5:50 pm
There is an Inforrm case comment and one from the RPC Privacy Blog. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 5:16 pm
In the case of Pinto Coelho v Portugal (No.2) ([2016] ECHR 296)(only in French) the Fourth Section of the Court of Human Rights held (by a 6:1 majority) that the imposition of a fine on a journalist who had published unauthorised audio recordings of a criminal trial was a breach of Article 10. [read post]
17 Jul 2015, 4:07 pm
The decision is a surprising and retrograde one in the light of the recent Grand Chamber decision in Morice v France (see the Inforrm case comment). [read post]
21 May 2021, 4:21 pm
Raghav Mendiratta, Global Freedom of Expression Legal Rearcher, in an article for Inforrm’s Blog observes that civil liberties and free expression have seen a slow but steady breakdown in India over the last few years, culminating in the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (‘the 2021 Rules’). [read post]
17 Oct 2010, 5:32 pm
Another RPC partner David Hooper is quoted in Legal week as suggesting that “The rise in celebrities bringing cases and the ‘no win, no fee’ culture has meant that there has been a significant increase in the number of defamation claims of late” Inforrm contributor Jonathan Coad is quoted in the Solicitors’ Journal as suggesting “brand awareness” as another reason for the increase in claims. [read post]
14 Sep 2021, 4:23 pm
This post is the second part of two posts on the draft Online Safety Bill. [read post]
29 Jul 2018, 3:11 am
In this context, the Judge confirmed a previously unsettled point of law: suspects in criminal investigations have a prima facie reasonable expectation of privacy (see Professor Callender-Smith’s Inforrm post). [read post]
21 Jul 2014, 5:08 am
Please let Inforrm know: inforrmeditorial@gmail.com. [read post]
11 Nov 2018, 8:02 pm
In an INFORRM post Hugh Stephens considers the implications for copyright law due to legislating for internet regulation. [read post]
6 Jun 2010, 7:50 am
News The decision of Mr Justice Tugendhat to order trial by judge alone was an Inforrm exclusive and we also were first with the news of the application for permission to appeal. [read post]
2 Apr 2016, 4:43 pm
In the case of Sousa Goucha v Portugal ([2016] ECHR 284) the Fourth Section of the European Court of Human Rights held that the dismissal of a domestic defamation action by a gay television presenter was not a breach of his Article 8 right to reputation or of the prohibition of discrimination in Article 14. [read post]
17 Nov 2015, 4:42 pm
This is one of a series of posts about the pending EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), and its consequences for intermediaries and user speech online. [read post]
25 Apr 2011, 5:18 pm
The Prime Minister has said that he is “uneasy” about the development of a privacy law by judges based on the European Convention when this should be a matter for parliament. [read post]
28 Apr 2010, 5:28 pm
Hugh Tomlinson QC is a member of Matrix Chambers and of the Inforrm Committee. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 7:12 am
We wrote an Inforrm blog post on the first judgment here. [read post]
9 Oct 2014, 12:44 am
Hugh Tomlinson QC is a member of Matrix chambers and an editor of Inforrm For other posts on the Article 8 “right to reputation” see: Freedom of Expression and the Right to Reputation: Human Rights in Conflict – Stijn Smet “Is there a right to reputation? [read post]
26 Aug 2023, 4:05 am
Inforrm’s Blog features the article, originally published by The Conversation, that argues “trusted flaggers” can reduce the proliferation of harmful content on social media. [read post]
21 Jul 2021, 4:59 am
Every time that Britain’s national newspapers are threatened with a more effective form of regulation than that allegedly provided by IPSO, they are wont to scream blue murder that what is being proposed is nothing less than “state licensing” of the press. [read post]
