Communications in UK Law

  • Attorney General of Belize and Others v Belize Telecom and another
    • Privy Council
    • 18 Mar 2009
  • Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
    • House of Lords
    • 28 Oct 1999
    ......Suffice to say, Braddock v. Bevins did not place election communications into a special category. . 30 In Derbyshire County Council v. Times Newspapers Ltd. [1993] A.C. 534 this House held that it ......
  • Easy Air Ltd v Opal Telecom Ltd
    • Chancery Division
    • 08 Abr 2009
    ...... to say that COMUGs were illegal, and relied on a decision of the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) in Floe Telecom Ltd v Office of Communications [2006] CAT 17 . That case concerned (among other things) the interpretation of a licence granted to Vodafone. The CAT decided that, on the true ......
  • Lloyds Bowmaker Ltd v Britannia Arrow Holdings Plc
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 18 Mar 1987
    ......Lavens (T/A Commend Communications)(by original action) Britannia Arrow Holdings PLC and Lloyds Bowmaker Limited and A.G. Lavens (T/A ......
  • Balabel v Air India
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 16 Mar 1988
    ......Boardly, the issue is whether such privilege extends only to communications seeking or conveying legal advice, or to all that passes between solicitor and client on matters within the ordinary business of a solicitor. ......
  • Loutchansky v Times Newspapers Ltd (No. 2)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 05 Dic 2001
    ......In such cases, the occasion prevents the inference of malice, which the law draws from unauthorised communications, and affords a qualified defence depending upon the absence of actual malice. If fairly warranted by any reasonable occasion or exigency, and ......
  • AT&T Knowledge Ventures & CVON Innovations v The Comptroller General General of Patents, Designs & Trade Marks
    • Chancery Division (Patents Court)
    • 03 Mar 2009
  • Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 08 Jul 1998
    ...... on Defamation (2nd edn) paragraphs 14.04 —14.05 as follows:- "From the broad general principle that certain communications should be protected by qualified privilege in `the general interest of society' the courts have developed the concept that there must exist between ......
  • Apple Corps Ltd v Apple Computer Inc. [ChD]
    • Chancery Division
    • 07 Abr 2004
    ...... Corporation [1955] 2 QB 327 at 334 , approved in Brinkibon v Stahag Stahl [1983] 2 AC 34 a 41–2 (in the case of instantaneous communications the contract is made where the acceptance is received the contract was made in California). Corps puts the final events the other way round – Mr ......
  • Minter v Priest
    • House of Lords
    • 20 Mar 1930
    ....... . 2 The privilege claimed is that which covers communications between a solicitor and his client, a privilege the maintenance of which is essential in the best interests of society; the examination, therefore, ......
  • See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT