PEN American Center v. Trump
U.S., Bano v. Union Carbide Corp., 361 F.3d 696 (2d Cir. 2004)
U.S., Bano v. Union Carbide Corp., 361 F.3d 696 (2d Cir. 2004)
This decision of the Madras High is binding on the lower courts in the State of Madras. However, it needs to be noted that this decision was taken at a pre-trial stage while determination of the request to quash criminal proceedings under various hate speech enactments. Thus, the arguments relying on the observations of the Court for advancing arguments on merits would have limited persuasive value.
Selahattin Demirtaş v. Turkey (no. 2): Prosecution of An Opposition Leader in Turkey
The Government of India has drawn flak this year for its aggressive campaign to intensify the regulation of digital service providers, its latest target being…
by Atmaja Tripathy[1] In an era where expression via the internet is recognised as a quintessential part of freedom of speech and expression[2], sovereigns are…
The 2015 Significant Legal Ruling Prize went to the judgment of Rolfsen and Association of Norwegian Editors v. the Norwegian Prosecution Authority delivered by the…
On June 21, 1989, the Supreme Court of the United States held that imposing damages on a newspaper for publishing an article detailing the facts…
Defamation Act 1952 Bonnard v Perryman [1891] 2 Ch 269. Banco de Portugal v Waterlow [1932] AC 452 at 506 Clarke v Bain [2008] EWHC…
Pro bono defence for journalists: two legal defence centres fighting for press freedom in Italy Ossigeno per l’Informazione and the Italian Coalition for Civil Liberties…
Published in International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, November 2023 Abstract In 2023, the Grand Chamber of the…