Search for: "Johnston v. Johnston" Results 201 - 220 of 761
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jun 2023, 8:32 am by Patricia Hughes
The test in Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v. [read post]
13 Apr 2010, 10:39 am by Dave
Now, this is a really important point, I think (and not one that I'd given much thought to before reading the decision) because it does raise both a technical ground of appeal as well as, much more importantly in my eyes, an important right for the applicant on a review to make written/oral submissions (on which see our notes of Banks v Kingston-upon-Thames LBC [2009] HLR 29 & Lambeth LBC v Johnston [2009] HLR 10, esp at [53], again per Rimer LJ). [read post]
13 Apr 2010, 10:39 am by Dave
Now, this is a really important point, I think (and not one that I'd given much thought to before reading the decision) because it does raise both a technical ground of appeal as well as, much more importantly in my eyes, an important right for the applicant on a review to make written/oral submissions (on which see our notes of Banks v Kingston-upon-Thames LBC [2009] HLR 29 & Lambeth LBC v Johnston [2009] HLR 10, esp at [53], again per Rimer LJ). [read post]
17 Dec 2013, 3:05 am by paola Aurucci
Perez v Fernandez: Australia's First Decision on the Moral Right of Integrity" (2013) 23 Australian Intellectual Property Journal 174UWA Faculty of Law Research Paper No. 2013-32JANI MCCUTCHEON, University of Western Australia - Faculty of LawEmail: jani.mccutcheon@uwa.edu.auThis article examines the recent Federal Magistrates Court decision of Perez v Fernandez, Australia’s first case on the moral right of integrity. [read post]
14 Jun 2012, 5:00 am
Addressing Watson’s claim of defamation, the Appellate Division noted that "A public official [as a police officer, Watson was a public officer] may not recover damages for defamation unless the official proves that the offending false statement was made with actual malice -- that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not," citing Freeman v Johnston, 84 NY2d 52. [read post]