Search for: "People v. Peck (1996)" Results 1 - 6 of 6
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jul 2014, 4:30 am by INFORRM
  This was resolved by the Court of Appeal in Polly Peck (Holdings) plc v Trelford [1986] QB 1000, with O’Connor LJ stating (with unanimous approval): “In my judgment section 5 plainly requires the distinct charges against the plaintiff to be founded on separate words, and these must be contained in the passages of which the plaintiff complains. [read post]
23 Oct 2011, 5:55 pm by INFORRM
. “Identifiable” material would be treated differently from “non-identifiable” content, with the aspiration “that, over time, people will pay less attention to and take less notice of material which is anonymous”. [read post]
7 Jul 2016, 4:13 pm by INFORRM
Teaching academic, author of acclaimed defamation law textbooks, leading media law barrister in Australia and the UK, Dr Matt Collins QC packs a lot into his day … He agreed to spare some of his time to discuss defamation, privacy, celebrity, journalists’ sources, and free speech, just for starters GLJ: I wanted to start by asking you what you see as the major flaws in Australian defamation law, and how you might go about correcting them. [read post]