Search for: "INFORRM"
Results 741 - 760
of 953
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Feb 2020, 4:11 pm
In an INFORRM post Ingrida Milkaite explores the ECtHR’s judgment in the case and the issue of hate crimes. [read post]
9 Sep 2011, 5:04 pm
In May 2011 at the height of “super-injunction spring” the Government announced the establishment of a Joint Committee on Privacy and Injunctions. [read post]
25 Sep 2019, 4:27 pm
Arguments relating to the concept of public domain and, in particular, analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision in PJS v News Group Newspapers [2016] UKSC 26, and privacy law generally, have been expertly dealt with in two previous Inforrm posts from the Brett Wilson Media Law Blog and Rebecca Moosavian. [read post]
26 Jan 2013, 4:08 pm
In his Report Lord Justice Leveson considered and rejected a proposal that there should be a statutory right of reply or correction. [read post]
5 Feb 2024, 4:22 pm
If you would like to read a summary of the judgment you can read my previous post for Inforrm here: Myth 1: “This judgment means it’s true Lawrence Fox is a racist” The judgment didn’t decide this. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 5:57 pm
Yesterday’s decision in Guardian v Westminster Magistrates emphasises that not only is the ancient principle of open justice crucial to the rule of law, it is at the very heart of the common law tradition (see: David Banisar on Inforrm’s Blog reprinted from the Guardian | Brid Jordan on RPC Privacy Blog | Judith Townend on Meeja Law). [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 3:17 am
Events We draw attention to the Inforrm, Media Standards Trust, Gray’s Inn event on 11 January 2011: “Libel Reform: in the Public’s Interest? [read post]
1 Apr 2012, 11:00 pm
Inforrm’s blog provides a case summary with a bit more detail, for those interested. [read post]
1 Nov 2018, 6:52 pm
One academic commentator, Paul Wragg, takes a different view, on the Inforrm blog. [read post]
4 Jan 2019, 4:34 pm
Geoffrey Rush would have zero chance of securing a successful libel verdict if he sued in the United States over the “inappropriate behaviour” story. [read post]
27 Apr 2010, 5:36 pm
In this feature we revisit some older posts which may still be of current interest. [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 2:31 am
US Law and Media News Once again, this will be the subject of a separate post From the Blogs The Strasbourg Observers blog has two posts of interest to Inforrm readers. [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]
13 Sep 2011, 2:54 am
For those who remain curious about the latest developments in the phone hacking saga, why not check out the Inforrm’s Blog latest updates? [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 4:22 am
The new “Law Think” blog has a couple of posts which will interest Inforrm readers. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:28 am
In a unanimous decision ([2012] UKSC 11) the Supreme Court today allowed the appeal of Times Newspapers Ltd against a decision of the Court of Appeal ([2010] EWCA Civ 804) which had held that held that it could not rely on Reynolds qualified privilege. [read post]
8 Mar 2020, 5:10 pm
In an INFORRM post Henry Pearce has considered the implications of Google seeking to move UK users’ data to the US. [read post]
23 May 2021, 4:08 pm
We had an Inforrm Post and The Press Gazette had a piece. [read post]
1 Oct 2017, 4:08 pm
Recent decisions in the Courts News from last term, we draw attention to the fact that the Supreme Court has refused the defendant permission to appeal in the case of HH Prince Moulay Hicham Ben Abdallah Al Alaoui of Morocco v Elaph Publishing Ltd (which permitted concurrent libel and data protection claims) In other data protection news, on 13 September 2017 the Court of Appeal gave the claimant permission to appeal in the case of Stunt v Associated Newspapers (see the… [read post]
29 Aug 2010, 6:31 am
But there is a growing consensus that we need to shift, at the very least, towards the balance that emerged after the New York Times Company v Sullivan decision” This “growing consensus” does not, we are afraid, include either Inforrm or the European Court of Human Rights. [read post]
