Search for: "Blowers v. Blowers"
Results 1 - 20
of 355
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Apr 2024, 5:50 am
In addition, opportunities for civil society or victim groups to intervene during criminal proceedings to advocate for compensation are limited, as highlighted in Nigeria v. [read post]
4 Mar 2024, 1:19 am
The Judge found that the broadcast bore the following defamatory meanings of the claimant companies: there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the claimants were responsible for the abuse and exploitation of workers, and the persecution of a whistle-blower, at ATA, one of their supplier companies located in Malaysia, and that they tried to cover up the allegations and shut down public criticism. [read post]
22 Jan 2024, 5:55 am
As a result, it could lead to the criminal prosecution of acts carried out with beneficial intent, such as security research, the activities of whistle-blowers, or investigative journalism. [read post]
11 Dec 2023, 1:22 am
An injunction issued, say, on the basis of a patent to a hot air blower that blocks all sales of convertible cars [here] seems at odds with this principle, at least at first glance. [read post]
6 Nov 2023, 4:11 pm
First, the rule in Bonnard v Perryman makes interim injunctions very difficult where (as would almost always be the case in a putative SLAPP), the primary cause of action is defamation. [read post]
13 Oct 2023, 4:00 am
National/Federal Ex-Treasurer for Rep. [read post]
12 Oct 2023, 9:13 am
See WBIP, LLC v. [read post]
22 Aug 2023, 5:42 am
When examining whether mass surveillance measures are necessary and proportionate under Article 8 ECHR, the European Court of Human Rights has focused its review on whether appropriate safeguards against government abuse exist.While the Court has not recently carried out a balancing exercise between the benefits sought by mass surveillance and its impact on society, the Grand Chamber judgment from S. and Marper v. the U.K., a case in which the Court found unanimously that the collection and… [read post]
4 May 2023, 11:28 am
We advised the “whistle-blower” crew members to notify the CDC. [read post]
14 Mar 2023, 5:05 pm
The Grand Chamber builds on its earlier case law, integrating the developments which have occurred since the judgment in Guja v. [read post]
25 Feb 2023, 3:44 am
ChileAstraZeneca S.A. v. [read post]
17 Nov 2022, 6:30 am
In Construction Industry Laborers Pension Fund v. [read post]
17 Nov 2022, 6:30 am
In Construction Industry Laborers Pension Fund v. [read post]
4 Oct 2022, 7:00 am
Corp. v. [read post]
8 Sep 2022, 5:00 pm
# # #READ THE DECISION HERE: Murray v. [read post]
26 Jul 2022, 6:48 pm
The recent reversal of Roe v. [read post]
6 May 2022, 4:00 am
National/Federal A Decision to Overturn Roe v. [read post]
28 Apr 2022, 4:17 pm
“One report suggests a greater interest at the corporate level of identifying the sources of complaints as opposed to addressing the underlying concerns raised,” according to the whistle blower complaint. [read post]
1 Apr 2022, 5:00 am
" Such actions may constitute adverse personnel action within the meaning of §75-b in the same way that the State Human Rights Law has been found to cover certain violations of the State Human Rights Law, citing Beckett v Prudential Ins. [read post]
1 Apr 2022, 5:00 am
" Such actions may constitute adverse personnel action within the meaning of §75-b in the same way that the State Human Rights Law has been found to cover certain violations of the State Human Rights Law, citing Beckett v Prudential Ins. [read post]
