Search for: "HARMS v. HARMS"
Results 61 - 80
of 36,471
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Nov 2011, 5:39 am
Division of Youth and Family Services v. [read post]
15 Nov 2022, 1:30 pm
In a November judgment in Lakay v Minister of Justice & Another 2022 ZAWCHC 221, the court confirmed that the occupier of a property has a legal duty to prevent foreseeable harm to persons visiting the property. [read post]
26 Apr 2024, 4:50 pm
In the US Supreme Court case Miller v. [read post]
13 Sep 2017, 4:08 pm
The Court of Appeal has now handed down judgment in Lachaux v AOL (UK), Independent Print Ltd & Evening Standard Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1334, indicating that rather than a wholesale reform of the law, the serious harm threshold represents a mere revision of the principle established in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) that in order to be defamatory a statement must surpass a threshold of seriousness, being a tendency to cause substantial… [read post]
13 Sep 2017, 4:08 pm
The Court of Appeal has now handed down judgment in Lachaux v AOL (UK), Independent Print Ltd & Evening Standard Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1334, indicating that rather than a wholesale reform of the law, the serious harm threshold represents a mere revision of the principle established in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) that in order to be defamatory a statement must surpass a threshold of seriousness, being a tendency to cause substantial… [read post]
13 Sep 2017, 4:08 pm
The Court of Appeal has now handed down judgment in Lachaux v AOL (UK), Independent Print Ltd & Evening Standard Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 1334, indicating that rather than a wholesale reform of the law, the serious harm threshold represents a mere revision of the principle established in Thornton v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2010] EWHC 1414 (QB) that in order to be defamatory a statement must surpass a threshold of seriousness, being a tendency to cause substantial… [read post]
28 Jan 2019, 9:02 am
___ Case citation: Rosenbach v. [read post]
12 Sep 2017, 4:40 am
On 12 September 2017 the Court of Appeal handed down judgment in the important “serious harm” case of Lachaux v. [read post]
3 Nov 2022, 4:00 am
In R. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2022, 3:44 am
Ward v Klein 2022 NY Slip Op 02153 [203 AD3d 1216] March 30, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department represents the “no harm-no foul” analysis frequently applied to legal malpractice claims. [read post]
25 Mar 2022, 8:54 am
–State v. [read post]
29 Oct 2009, 5:12 am
This presumption cannot be squared with traditional principles of equity, as interpreted in numerous Supreme Court decisions, particularly eBay, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 9:59 am
We are showcasing the presentations of participants in the What’s the Harm? [read post]
17 Oct 2022, 8:32 am
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently held in Clemens v. [read post]
2 Jan 2024, 5:24 am
Avitia v. [read post]
23 Mar 2018, 5:46 am
On 21 March 2018 the Supreme Court (Lords Kerr and Reed and Lady Black) granted the defendants permission to appeal in the case of Lachaux v Independent Print. [read post]
12 Nov 2020, 10:47 am
Check out our prior Jander v. [read post]
8 Jun 2023, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court decided AMG Capital Management v. [read post]
20 Jul 2021, 9:04 am
In TransUnion v. [read post]
18 Apr 2024, 6:00 am
Supreme Court issued its decision in Muldrow v. [read post]
