Sunday, 23 February 2014

Ukranian oligarchs using UK defamation laws to prevent stories about wealth

Rinat Akhmetov - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "In 2008, a judgment was obtained from the High Court of Justice in London after Obozrevatel, a Ukrainian language Internet publication refused to retract false and libelous statements alleging that Mr. Akhmetov was connected to criminal activity and violence. The Obozrevatel report interviewed his former classmates and neighbors, and delved into his early years." 'via Blog this'

Wednesday, 5 February 2014

Audiovisual Media Services: European Regulators Group

Audiovisual Media Services: European Regulators Group: "European Commission has formally established a group of EU Regulatory Authorities in the field of Audiovisual Media Services. The Group brings together heads or high level representatives of national independent regulatory bodies in the field of audiovisual services, to advise the Commission in implementing the EU's Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) in a converged media age.

The European Regulators Group for Audiovisual Media Services will advise and assist the Commission in its work to ensure consistent implementation of the AVMSD and other related fields in which the Commission can act. It will facilitate cooperation between regulatory bodies in the EU, and will also allow for an exchange of experience and good practice." 'via Blog this'

English court confirms existence of privacy tort

English court confirms existence of privacy tort | TechnoLlama: "Tugendhat J. had to consider whether misuse of private information, breach of confidence and breach of DPA statutory duties amount to a claim in tort. [He] first referred back to Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 WLR 1232 where Lord Nicholls established that breach of confidence was better encapsulated by another concept, that of misuse of private information, and commented that the tort, however labelled, “affords respect for one aspect of an individual’s privacy”. [He] also referred to Douglas v Hello [2005] EWCA Civ 595 and Imerman v Tchenguiz [2011] Fam 116 as other cases where the tort of misuse of private information had been mentioned.

The judge then concluded that “the tort of misuse of private information is a tort” within the meaning of the CPR rules." 'via Blog this'