Search for: "Tomlinson v. Tomlinson"
Results 121 - 140
of 532
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2023, 8:53 am
Criteria to be applied In contrast to the Chamber, the Grand Chamber considered that the Axel Springer criteria for balancing Articles 8 and 10 (see Axel Springer v Germany [2012] ECHR 227)) were not applicable. [read post]
30 Apr 2010, 12:49 am
This was first posted on 26 February 2010 and is the last of a three part post in which Hugh Tomlinson QC considers the future of the law of privacy in the UK. [read post]
26 Nov 2011, 1:40 am
Were it otherwise, the press would be unable to play its vital role of ‘public watchdog’ (Observer and Guardian v United Kingdom (1992) 14 EHRR 153, [59(b)]). [read post]
3 Aug 2015, 4:10 pm
In the case of Lachaux v Independent Print ([2015] EWHC 2242 (QB)) Warby J gave judgement on preliminary issues including in relation to “serious harm” in a number of libel actions brought against three newspapers and the Huffington Post. [read post]
7 Jul 2015, 4:09 pm
The Court considered the recent analysis of the English High Court’s power to grant injunctions in the case of Cartier International AG v British Sky Broadcasting Limited ([2014] EWHC 3354 (Ch))(see our discussion here). [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 2:05 pm
Tomlinson, 329 S.W.3d 128, 141 n.2 (Tex. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 5:07 pm
The decision of the Court of Human Rights in Novaya Gazeta v Russia ([2013] ECHR 251) is an interesting reminder of the requirement of journalistic responsibility even in the context of public interest articles about politicians. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 4:50 pm
Yueng v. [read post]
21 Aug 2014, 5:20 pm
Google contended that it was not, relying on the English decisions of in Metropolitan International Schools Ltd v Designtechnica Corporation [2009] EWHC 1765 and Tamiz v Google Inc [2012] EWHC 449. [read post]
3 May 2011, 10:30 pm
Although in Von Hannover v Germany ((2004) 40 EHRR 1) there was an element of harassment, a series of subsequent cases have found violations resulting from [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 5:02 pm
In the case of Glik v Cunniffe (26 August 2011) the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit held that there is a First Amendment right to record police activity in public. [read post]
MBL/Inforrm Conference Paper: “Defamation Bill: Trivial Libels and Jurisdiction” – Hugh Tomlinson QC
20 Jul 2010, 4:30 am
Furthermore, the result of the decision in Thornton v. [read post]
21 Mar 2012, 10:22 am
In a unanimous decision ([2012] UKSC 11) the Supreme Court today allowed the appeal of Times Newspapers Limited against a decision of the Court of Appeal ([2010] EWCA Civ 804) which had held that held that it could not rely on Reynolds qualified privilege. [read post]
6 Nov 2008, 2:47 pm
Tomlinson J revisited the decision on enforcement and gave judgment on two heads of claim in the award.The decision of Tomlinson J was challenged by the NNPC in the Court of Appeal. [read post]
31 May 2015, 4:30 am
In the absence of actual harm, privacy cases are hardly worth pursuing http://t.co/6RYcmFS01Q -> United States: Nudity, Privacy and the Prostitute – Susan Brenner http://t.co/8r3oTanQVT -> Case Law: Gulati v MGN Ltd, A landmark decision on the quantum of privacy damages – Hugh Tomlinson http://t.co/qHm27iucpC -> Web Site Accessibility Standards in Ontario http://t.co/5GkvGyebgZ -> Computer and Internet Law Weekly Updates for 2015-05-23: Computer and… [read post]
5 Nov 2010, 4:21 am
It includes the intrinsic worth of human beings shared by all people as well as the individual reputation of each person built upon his or her own individual achievements” (Khumalo v Holomisa [2002] ZACC 12 [27] ) There is social value in ensuring that false statements which adversely impact on a person’s reputation are corrected. [read post]
8 Nov 2010, 4:32 pm
Furthermore, the result of the decision in Thornton v. [read post]
30 Nov 2010, 4:22 pm
For example, in Giorgi Nikolaishvili v. [read post]
22 Sep 2014, 5:30 pm
In the cases of Karácsony and v Hungary and Szél v.Hungary (applications nos. 42461/13 and 44357/13) decided on 16 September 2014 the Second Section of the European Court of Human Rights held that financial sanctions imposed by the Speaker on demonstrating members of the opposition in the Hungarian Parliament were a violation of Article 10. [read post]
21 Jan 2011, 4:00 am
The only “media case” amongh the five was Novaya Gazeta V Voronezhe v. [read post]
