Search for: "State v. Tench"
Results 1 - 20
of 41
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2010, 1:00 am
On 13 July, Sir Anthony May, the President of the Queen’s Bench Division, and Mr Justice Blair handed down their judgment in R (Gaunt) v Ofcom. [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 6:04 am
Dan Tench is a partner in the Litigation Department at Olswang LLP [read post]
29 Oct 2012, 5:07 pm
Dan Tench is a partner and Jack Gilbert an associate in the Olswang Commercial Litigation team, specialising in media and commercial dispute resolution. [read post]
6 Apr 2010, 5:18 am
” Now after A, plainly the refusal to provide information to the media by the state does engage Article 10. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 4:51 pm
Dan Tench, Emma Boffey, Graeme MacLeod and Jo Clark are solicitors at CMS This post originally appeared on the CMS Law-Now website and is reproduced with permission and thanks [read post]
21 Jul 2015, 4:22 pm
Damages Dan Tench explained how the remedies available to individuals asserting data protection rights have been widened by the landmark ruling in Google v Vidal-Hall [2015] EWCA Civ 311, as s 13(2) of the DPA has now been disapplied and individuals are entitled to recover damages under the Act for non-material loss. [read post]
16 May 2015, 4:03 pm
In Kerner v (1) WX (2) YZ (Persons Unknown), Mr Justice Warby has continued an harassment injunction and ordered disclosure against the DVLA so that the claimants can obtain details which may track down the respondents, a photographer and his associate. [read post]
23 May 2019, 4:26 am
Omar Qureshi, Dan Tench and Cathryn Hopkins of CMS comment on the decision which was handed down on 15 May 2019 by the UK Supreme Court in the matter of R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal and others [2019] UKSC 22: On 15 May 2019, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment, deciding by a slim majority of 4:3 that an “ouster clause” in section 67(8) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (“RIPA”)… [read post]
3 Jul 2010, 1:21 am
Dan Tench is a partner in the Litigation and Arbitration Group at Olswang LLP and is the Head of Judicial Review and Public Law. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 4:08 pm
This was because insufficient steps had been taken to notify the media contrary to the Master of the Rolls’ Practice Guidance [2012] 1 WLR 100, which states that respondents and non-parties who are to be served with or otherwise notified of the order are “entitled to advance notice of the application hearing and should be served with a copy of the Application Notice and any supporting documentation before that hearing”. [read post]
1 Aug 2015, 4:40 pm
The judge also stated that if the defendant were to become aware of other material which he wished to publish and considered that he should be permitted to do so, it was open to him to apply to vary the order. [read post]
20 May 2015, 3:30 am
They carefully considered the historical context of the decision in Wilkinson v Downton. [read post]
12 Feb 2016, 5:02 am
The judge stated that “it is quite plain in my view that it is a “lifestyle” interview” and accepted that he had “no authority in that capacity to make statements”. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 5:15 pm
Lord Neuberger in the Court of Appeal went as far as to state as follows. [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 5:56 pm
The decision handed down last week by the United States Supreme Court in United States v Stevens shows the radically different approach taken in the United States in relation questions of “extreme” and “offensive” freedom of expression. [read post]
29 Jul 2014, 4:30 am
Dan Tench is a partner in the Litigation Department at Olswang LLP [read post]
22 May 2019, 4:58 pm
In Lord Carnwath’s view, the provision in s.67(8) RIPA for a route of appeal to the Secretary of State did not add anything, given that that power had not been exercised and was ultimately an executive power, so did not support the argument that the courts should not have ultimate control [104]. [read post]
28 Jul 2014, 4:30 am
Dan Tench is a partner in the Litigation Department at Olswang LLP [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 4:31 pm
In the case of R (Ingenious Media) v HMRC ([2016] UKSC 54) UK Supreme Court held that information provided by taxpayers to HMRC is confidential and that HMRC acted unlawfully by disclosing such information to journalists. [read post]
8 Dec 2015, 8:06 am
Article V required a call when two-thirds of the states applied for (demanded) it. [read post]
