Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Maharaj Libel Case was an 1862 trial in the Supreme Court of Bombay, in British India. The case was initiated by Jadunath Brajratanjee Maharaj against Nanabhai Rustomji Ranina and Karsandas Mulji. It stemmed from an editorial article they had published, which accused the Vallabhacharya and Pushtimarg Sect of certain alleged controversial ...
English law allows actions for libel to be brought in the High Court for any published statements alleged to defame a named or identifiable individual or individuals (under English law companies are legal persons, and allowed to bring suit for defamation [22] [23] [24]) in a manner that causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a ...
The legal burden of proof in defamation actions is thus higher in the case of a public figure than in the case of an ordinary person. Libel laws vary considerably on this matter from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Even within a cultural grouping, the libel laws of the UK are quite different from those in the US, for example.
The 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, however, radically changed the nature of libel law in the United States by establishing that public officials could win a suit for libel only when they could prove the media outlet in question knew either that the information was wholly and patently false or that it was published "with reckless ...
A libel, in admiralty law, is the first pleading of the complainant. Process. It is filed in the office of the clerk of the court to commence the action. It is in the ...
This is done mostly in realistic films and television programs to reduce the possibility of legal action for libel from any person who believes that they have been defamed by their portrayal in the work, whether portrayed under their real name or a different name. The wording of this disclaimer varies, and differs from jurisdiction to ...
In a legal context, a chilling effect is the inhibition or discouragement of the legitimate exercise of natural and legal rights by the threat of legal sanction. [1] A chilling effect may be caused by legal actions such as the passing of a law, the decision of a court, or the threat of a lawsuit; any legal action that would cause people to hesitate to exercise a legitimate right (freedom of ...
The Supreme Court adopted the actual malice standard in its landmark 1964 ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, [2] in which the Warren Court held that: . The constitutional guarantees require, we think, a Federal rule that prohibits a public official from recovering damages for a defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with ...