Search for: "McCallum v. State"
Results 61 - 68
of 68
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Sep 2016, 10:21 am
There has been some judicial support for this principle in Australia, most notably Justice McCallum in Bleyer v Google Inc, but there has also been judicial criticism and resistance. [read post]
26 Mar 2017, 4:06 pm
Events 4 April 2017, “The Commonwealth and Challenges to Media Freedom” conference at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies 28 April 2017, “Conference on Freedom of Expression Online,” Nicosia, Filoxenia Conference Centre, Cyprus Media Law in Other Jurisdictions Australia In the case of Mohareb v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Limited [2017] NSWSC 288 McCallum J had to consider a series of pleaded imputations including “The plaintiff is such an… [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 8:16 am
The court, as per R v McCallum, 1970 CanLII 594 (SKQB), has established that if it is found that the accused gave false evidence, with knowledge of the facts, it was with an intention to deceive; people only lie to mislead. [read post]
20 Mar 2016, 5:05 pm
On 16 and 17 March 2016, there was a two day hearing in Decoulos v Axel Springer Schweiz AG & ors On 11 March 2016 there was a judgement in the case of Monarch Airlines Ltd v Yaqub. [read post]
22 Dec 2023, 4:00 am
Part of the GGC’s stated vision during the election was support for “evidence-based” governance. [read post]
22 May 2012, 5:38 am
It provides a good academic and judicial analysis of the current state of media regulation in Australia. [read post]
15 May 2007, 4:48 am
., that it violated FISA and that the Article II argument OLC had previously approved was not an adequate justification (a conclusion prompted by the New AAG, Jack Goldsmith, having undertaken a systematic review of OLC's previous legal opinions regarding the Commander in Chief's powers); (ii) that the White House nevertheless continued with the program anyway, despite DOJ's judgment that it was unlawful; (iii) that Comey, Ashcroft, the head of the FBI (Robert Mueller) and several… [read post]
15 May 2007, 4:48 am
., that it violated FISA and that the Article II argument OLC had previously approved was not an adequate justification (a conclusion prompted by the New AAG, Jack Goldsmith, having undertaken a systematic review of OLC's previous legal opinions regarding the Commander in Chief's powers); (ii) that the White House nevertheless continued with the program anyway, despite DOJ's judgment that it was unlawful; (iii) that Comey, Ashcroft, the head of the FBI (Robert Mueller) and several… [read post]
