Case Law, Australia: Gacic v John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd, Damages increase for restaurateurs defamed by Sydney Morning Herald review – Yvonne Kux

2 05 2015

gazetteIn the case of Aleksandra & Ljiljana Gacic & Branislav Ciric v John Fairfax Publications Pty Ltd & Matthew Evans ([2015] NSWCA 99) the NSW Court of Appeal increased the $160,000 damages awarded to each of three former restaurateurs defamed by a Sydney Morning Herald review twelve years ago. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Reactiv Media Limited v The Information Commissioner, “Cold Calling” company fined £75,000 for breach of privacy – Rosalind English

18 04 2015

TelephoneAlthough an individual’s right to privacy is usually thought of in the context of state intrusion in one form or another, in reality the real threat of intrusion in a society such as ours comes from unsolicited marketing calls. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, South Africa: City of Cape Town v Sanral, “It tolls for open justice” – Dario Milo

9 04 2015

Cape TownLast week, the South African Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) handed down its decision ( [2015] ZASCA 58) in the appeal by the City of Cape Town against a Western Cape High Court decision which had dramatically undermined the principle of open justice. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law, Australia: Rateb Jneid v Western Australian Newspapers Limited, Isolated front page a distinct publication – Carmel Galati

8 04 2015

gazetteIn the case of Jneid v Western Australian Newspapers ([2015] WASC 68) the Western Australia Supreme Court found that the front page of The West Australian newspaper displayed in a glass box, is a separate act of publication for the purposes of maintaining a defamation claim. The court also found it was capable of conveying an imputation without reference to a story in the body of the paper. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Vidal-Hall v Google, Distress damages can be awarded under s 13 DPA without pecuniary loss (and misuse of private information is a tort) – Lorna Skinner

31 03 2015

igooglemagesIn Vidal-Hall v, Google Inc ([2015] EWCA Civ 311) the Court of Appeal dismissed Google’s appeal from the decision of Tugendhat J in which he declined to declare that the English court did not have jurisdiction to hear data protection and misuse of private information claims brought against it. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Law: Cruddas v Calvert, Sunday Times appeal allowed in part, ex Conservative Treasurer’s damages reduced to £50,000

17 03 2015

Sunday Times CruddasThe Sunday Times and two of its journalists have been partially successful in their appeal against the decision of Tugendhat J in Cruddas v Calvert awarding damages of  £180,000 to former Conservative party treasurer, Peter Cruddas ([2015] EWCA Civ 171). The Court of Appeal unanimously allowed the appeal on one of three grounds, finding that the allegation of corrupt conduct was true. Read the rest of this entry »





Case Comment: Fenty v Arcadia Group Brands Ltd, Rihanna succeeds in controlling how her image is used – Sara Mansoori

19 02 2015

riri%20tshirtRihanna’s successful claim against Topshop, which prevents it from selling t-shirts displaying a photograph of her, has been reported as being ‘a test case about the ability of celebrities to control their public image’ (see The Guardian’s report of the judgment). It was, in fact, a passing off claim and, as the Court of Appeal made clear in their decision ([2015] EWCA Civ 3), there is in English law no right to control one’s image. Read the rest of this entry »








Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,246 other followers