Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Dow Jones & Co Inc v Gutnick was an Internet defamation case heard in the High Court of Australia, decided on 10 December 2002. The 28 October 2000 edition of Barron's Online, published by Dow Jones, contained an article entitled "Unholy Gains" in which several references were made to the respondent, Joseph Gutnick. Gutnick contended that part ...
Khumalo and Others v Holomisa is a landmark decision in the South African law of delict.It was decided by the Constitutional Court of South Africa on 21 May 2002. Handing down judgment for a unanimous court, Justice Kate O'Regan held that the existing common law of defamation is consistent with the Bill of Rights.
The press, including print, television, radio, and internet are amended to express their concerns under the selected provisions such as PEMRA Ordinance 2002, Defamation Ordinance 2002, Broadcasting Corporation Act, 1973, and Code of Conduct for Media Broadcasters/Cable TV Operators. The Protection of Journalists Act, of 2014 allows a journalist ...
Besides the Press and Publication Ordinance (PPO) mentioned, these laws include the Printing Presses and Publications Ordinance 1988, the Freedom of Information Ordinance of 2002, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) of 2002, the Defamation Ordinance of 2002, the Contempt of Court Ordinance of 2003, the Press, Newspapers ...
Keith-Smith v Williams is a 2006 English libel case that confirmed that existing libel laws applied to internet discussion. [1]It was important because it was seen as the first UK internet libel case that represented two individuals rather than one party being an Internet Service Provider, [2] and was the first British case involving a successful prosecution of an individual poster within a ...
Crosby v Kelly is an important Federal Court of Australia case concerning the jurisdiction of the court to hear defamation claims. The judgment of the Full Court confirmed that the Court has original jurisdiction to hear defamation claims that could be heard by a Territory court, specifically the Supreme Court of the Australian Capital Territory.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd was a House of Lords case in English defamation law concerning qualified privilege for publication of defamatory statements in the public interest. The case provided the Reynolds defence , which could be raised where it was clear that the journalist had a duty to publish an allegation even if it turned out to be ...