Search for: "Wraggs v. State"
Results 1 - 20
of 119
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Jul 2017, 4:05 pm
Wragg’s post is here. [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 11:38 pm
In this sense, Barbulescu v Romania can be explained without specific reference to human rights. [read post]
18 Jul 2019, 4:53 pm
In the first, Tower Hamlets v The Times, the newspaper was ‘ordered’ to publish a summary of the adjudication. [read post]
6 Oct 2014, 4:55 pm
Dr Paul Wragg is associate professor in law, University of Leeds and UK academic fellow of the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple, London. [read post]
26 Jan 2022, 3:35 pm
Riley v Murray, then, sits uncomfortably with the Court of Appeal’s decision in Miller v College of Policing [2021] EWCA Civ 1926, which was handed down on the same day. [read post]
16 Nov 2017, 4:09 pm
Dr Paul Wragg, Editor in Chief, Communications Law, Associate Professor of Law, University of Leeds, Associate Academic Fellow, Inner Temple [read post]
27 Oct 2018, 7:52 am
Matters would be different if the decision in ABC v Telegraph Group concerned a permanent injunction or if the resolution of the full trial had raised serious matters of legal principle. [read post]
1 Sep 2013, 5:09 pm
Dr Paul Wragg is a lecturer in law at the University of Leeds and an academic fellow of the Inner Temple. [read post]
25 May 2015, 4:06 pm
Dr Paul Wragg is an Associate Professor of Law and the University of Leeds. [read post]
21 Jul 2018, 4:52 pm
There are three reasons why I think the case of Sir Cliff Richard v BBC is wrongly decided. [read post]
26 Mar 2018, 4:20 pm
This distinction is not clearly established in the preliminary hearing in Appleby v BBC and Guardian (not that it needed to be). [read post]
12 Sep 2021, 4:32 pm
As the particulars of claim make clear: ‘the claimants were deeply shocked and extremely distressed at the public revelation of these tragic and highly sensitive family matters which have been kept private (or ‘secret’ as the Defendant itself states in the article) for over 30 years. [read post]
17 Mar 2018, 5:47 am
Here, though, it is a question of horizontal (person to person) rather than vertical rights (state to individual). [read post]
10 Oct 2021, 8:40 am
It would be different, perhaps, if there was evidence of some massive state conspiracy to protect lawbreakers from criminal sanctions, but that scenario is far removed from what is happening here. [read post]
1 Nov 2018, 6:52 pm
Their involvement was clearly stated on the front page of the Court of Appeal judgment and they must be concerned about the potential damage to their reputation so casually inflicted by Hain’s action. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 2:45 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp v Teva UK Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 382 (08 April 2011) High Court (Queen’s Bench Division) Williams v Central Bank of Nigeria [2011] EWHC 876 (QB) (08 April 2011) The Legal Services Commission v F & Ors [2011] EWHC 899 (QB) (08 April 2011) High Court (Chancery Division) Moria & Anor v Bednash [2011] EWHC 839 (Ch) (08 April 2011) Batt v Royal Mail [2011] EWHC 900 (Ch) (08 April 2011)… [read post]
2 Aug 2022, 4:18 am
’ Fourthly, and relatedly, the response puts the greatest emphasis on the recipient’s emotions as evidence of the wrong requiring state intervention. [read post]
22 Dec 2021, 4:22 pm
– Robert Sharp News, Strasbourg: Pal v UK, Arrest and prosecution of a journalist violated Article 10 Saint Piers, Free Speech Martyr – Paul Wragg [read post]
22 Dec 2018, 3:24 am
We have had 425,000 page views this year, more than half from the UK with the United States, India, Australia and Ireland making up the rest of the top five. [read post]
17 Feb 2015, 5:41 am
The 2004 decision of the House of Lords in Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers ([2004] 2 AC 457) was a significant case regarding privacy, and for human rights law and tort law more generally. [read post]
