(Hong Kong) A newspaper had been ordered to reveal the source of a story wit regard to a corruption investigation. The statute required such disclosure only with regard to a named individual, and in this case no suspects name was yet known. The courts in the country of origin of the case had a margin of discretion as to the interference with freedom of expression of newspapers.
Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle, Lord Mustill, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Sir Ralph Gibson
[1996] UKPC 12, [1996] AC 907
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Considered – James and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 20 October 2021; Ref: scu.159168 br>