The International Forum for Responsible Media Blog

Tag: Supreme Court (Page 1 of 4)

Case Law: WM Morrison v Various Claimants, Supermarket not vicariously liable for mass data breach of employee – Ashley Hurst and Philip Kemp

In its judgment in the case of WM Morrison Supermarkets plc v Various Claimants ([2020] UKSC 12) handed down on 1 April 2020, the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal and found that Morrisons was not vicariously liable for a rogue employee who posted payroll data of 100,000 other employees on a file-sharing website. Continue reading

News: Lachaux v Independent Print, Supreme Court dismisses appeal but restores Judge’s analysis of “serious harm”

The Supreme Court today handed down its long awaited judgment in the case of Lachaux v Independent Print ([2019] UKSC 27).  The appeal was dismissed on the facts but the Court overturned the Court of Appeal’s interpretation of the “serious harm” test in s.1(1) of the Defamation Act 2013, preferring the analysis of Warby J at first instance. Continue reading

Case Law:  Stocker v Stocker, Supreme Court overturns Judge on meaning of “tried to strangle” – Oliver Cox

On 3 April 2019 the Supreme Court gave its judgment in Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17. The five Supreme Court judges (Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin) unanimously overturned the 12 February 2018 Court of Appeal decision given by Lady Justice Sharp, Lord Justice McFarlane and Sir John Laws ([2018] EWCA Civ 170). Continue reading

Case Law: R (P, G and W) and Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department, A criminal record or a clean slate? – Matthew Flinn

In the case of R (P, G and W) and Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department and Anor [2019] UKSC 3 the Supreme Court upheld challenges to the legal regimes for disclosing criminal records in England and Wales, and Northern Ireland, finding them to be incompatible with Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”). Continue reading

Case Law, Canada: Haaretz.com v Goldhar: Supreme Court rules on jurisdiction and forum in multi-jurisdictional Internet defamation claims – Natasha Holcroft-Emmess

In Haaretz.com v Goldhar 2018 SCC 28, the Canadian Supreme Court considered jurisdiction and forum conveniens in a multi-jurisdictional Internet libel claim. The Court was divided – allowing the news organisation’s appeal 6:3. All of the Justices concluded that Canada had jurisdiction to hear the claim, but a majority found that Israel was a clearly more appropriate forum. Continue reading

« Older posts

© 2020 Inforrm's Blog

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑