Comments for A Clatter of the Law

Comment on Please note by pg county landlord tenant court

pg county landlord tenant court — Fri, 11 May 2012 14:22:19 +0000

Thanks for sharing this privacy policy. Would I be able to share this to other?

Comment on More on court reporting of indecent material by Rossa McMahon

Rossa McMahon — Thu, 03 May 2012 13:38:27 +0000

TJ: That’s exactly it, s14 was obviously intended to protect us rather than the parties to the case. Dr Keating speaks in his interview of the practice among journalists at the time to use code words in articles, eg. “grave offence” etc.

In relation to matrimonial cases, section 14(2) of the 1929 Act was repealed by the Family Law (Divorce) Act 1996.

Comment on More on court reporting of indecent material by TJ

TJ — Thu, 03 May 2012 12:54:19 +0000

Excellent post. Sections 14 and 15 of the 1929 Act are rather confusing when viewed from a modern perspective – while our natural instinct is to see them as protective of the victim, their location within the wider context of censorship legislation makes it clear that they are intended to be protective of “public morals” rather than privacy. Consequently, it is unhelpful to try to fit them in to the modern framework of victim anonymity, etc.

In particular, the legislative history indicates that these sections were intended to close a perceived loophole whereby newspapers could report on salacious details of (in particular) matrimonial cases. The comments of the Minister for Justice are telling:

“Part 3 deals with the judicial proceedings. That follows very closely upon an Act recently passed in England, and which, I understand, has been found to work very successfully. It prevents the publication in certain classes of cases of any evidence except what is contained in the judge’s charge. Of course, those largely deal with divorce cases. We have not got any of them in this country, and it is very unlikely that part would be called into use very much here, because it is very unlikely that papers in this country would have details of what occurred in England and which were not published in the English Press…

Where there is an indecent case, say a case of indecent assault, or something of that kind, a newspaper may have given very full details of what took place. That penalty would then be liable to be inflicted upon the person who has published that unpleasant report.”

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/seanad/1929/04/10/00015.asp

Comment on Censorship in the 1920s, still on the books? by More on court reporting of indecent material « A Clatter of the Law

More on court reporting of indecent material « A Clatter of the Law — Thu, 03 May 2012 11:27:32 +0000

[...] Law | Levities | Limerick BlogAboutPlease note « Censorship in the 1920s, still on the books? [...]

Comment on New data protection rules on cookies & mandatory data breach reporting for electronic communications providers by Alta

Alta — Tue, 01 May 2012 15:55:50 +0000

The Regulations are lengthy but the Data Protection Commissioner already has a guidance note online outlining the changes introduced, the most significant being:

Comment on Marriage by default and the Civil Partnership Bill 2009 by FG propose to revisit the issue of Divorce and the Constituion - Page 8

FG propose to revisit the issue of Divorce and the Constituion - Page 8 — Mon, 02 Apr 2012 11:49:37 +0000

[...] The man's six cohabittess would all be in for a claim in the present legal situation as it is marriage by default by the state; even though if he had kids with any of the six women he would be an automatic legal [...]

Comment on Another drink driving technicality bites the dust (for now) by Rickie Macken

Rickie Macken — Sun, 11 Mar 2012 18:15:38 +0000

West Limerick fo the fore, again!!

Comment on A Clatter of the Law & World Intellectual Property Day 2010 by Rickie Macken

Rickie Macken — Sun, 11 Mar 2012 17:37:27 +0000

Reminds me of another tale, which is true, concerning a West Limerick man who, being a well-off bachelor farmer , fell foul of the law in that he was obliged by decree to pay dearly for the support of at least two ‘children-of-love’ that he had fathered.

The late Gary McMahon, was the solicitor who acted for the two successful nothers/plaintiff’s.

Following the most recent award against him, this farmer was drowning his sorrows over the lost money in a local pub.

On TV, there was a programme dealing with the issue of sex education in the schools.

A nearby imbiber turned to the sorrowing farmer and asked, ‘who taught you sex education?’

‘Gary McMahon! retorted the bachelor farmer with vehemence!

Comment on The strange, hypocritical attitude of the Irish Government to copyright, the internet and citizens by Ninth Level Ireland » Blog Archive » The strange, hypocritical attitude of the Irish Government to copyright, the internet and citizens

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 22:58:01 +0000

[...] “The introduction yesterday of an amendment to the Copyright & Related Rights Acts has been in the works for a long time (posts here, here and here). The issue has generated quite a bit of heat on both sides and the Government would do well to observe that opponents to the law have not held a monopoly on intemperate comment …” (more) [...]

Comment on Stop SOPA Ireland by The strange, hypocritical attitude of the Irish Government to copyright, the internet and citizens « A Clatter of the Law

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 11:03:48 +0000

[...] the Copyright & Related Rights Acts has been in the works for a long time (posts here, here and here). The issue has generated quite a bit of heat on both sides and the Government would do well to [...]