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.
Published in International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, November 2023 Abstract In 2023, the Grand Chamber of the…
The main issues for the Third Section of the ECtHR to analyze in this case were two. On the one hand, whether the Police report…
This blog was originally published by Inforrm’s Blog and is reproduced with permission and thanks. Shortly after the Russian military invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022,…
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 16, 2015, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) delivered judgement on Delfi AS v. Estonia. Delfi AS, one of Estonia’s largest online news…
ARTICLE 19 has filed a third-party intervention submission before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in the case Ganbarova and Others v Azerbaijan, where the Court…
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…
The initiative’s director, Dr. Agnès Callamard, published a paper in the National Law Review, titled “Comity for Internet? Recent Court Decisions on the Right to…