Showing posts from June, 2014

Are Social Media Companies Left Open to Litigation By a Lack of Legal Safeguards?

Guest PostAlthough social media is less than ten years old, its influence on not just the online world, but all forms of communication, has been immense. The influence of social media has spread beyond the online world to affect a great amount of culture.Perhaps the scale and importance of social media is best represented in numbers. A total of 1.2 billion people have Facebook accounts, with hundreds of millions logging in to the website each day to check messages, view photos and interact with friends. Other, ‘smaller’ social networks like Twitter have attracted more than 230 million active users. The userbase of Twitter sends out over 500 million collective tweets every single day – certainly not a small amount by anyone’s count.

The risk of defamation in social media

With the massive size of the social media world comes a considerable risk. Since the technology used in social media is almost completely instant, users can publish any message at any time, directed at almost any user. I…

A couple of thoughts on England

That is – the England football team.

The England squad: excelling at failure since oooh – at least the 1990s
Quite unsurprisingly, over the last few days, there’s been a ridonkulous amount of supposed analysis over England’s rather dismal performance in the 2014 World Cup.  Almost exclusively, that analysis has taken the form of trite observations from lazy columnists and rent-a-quote ‘has been’ pundits.I’ve had a couple of thoughts that I’ve not seen anywhere else as to why the England squad seem to fall consistently flat.Could it be down to the rather uninspiring nature of the country’s national anthem, failing to get them pumped-up before a game?Or is it that, as a nation, we’re just not very good at football?Have I hit the nail on the head?

Why Touchscreen Tech isn’t all that

New tech really doesn’t grab me

I’ve been musing over the world’s obsession with small-form-factor technology recently - particularly touchscreen devices - and struggling to understand why I haven’t been swept along with it. The simple fact is, while owning smartphones and tablets, I don’t particularly like using them and feel that the scope of their usefulness is an awful lot less than most other people seem to think. I’m really curious why that is. I have two smartphones kicking around (one personal – one work) and I try to avoid using either wherever possible. Quite often, a week will go by where I’ve not touched them. One of them stays on my desk at home (go figure) and the other remains secreted in my bag. I might check it during the week or I might not. I figure people can either email me or call the office. Quite often they do both. Bastards. I feel slightly warmer over tablets. But only slightly. I have a first-gen Nexus 7 and a Surface 2 with a typecover. As I have to grappl…

Overriding Objections

From PI Brief Update email sent 12/06/14:Last month's practitioner's section reported the case of Kaneria v Kaneria [2014] EWHC 1165 (Ch), in which it was held that Mitchellprinciples do not apply to in time applications for an extension of time. It was held that these applications should be decided by reference to the overriding objection [sic].Hehe. That’s super. In my experience, litigation gives rise to a lot of ‘overriding objections’.

Your rights if you’re injured in a public place

Guest PostThe owner, manager or proprietor of a public place is legally obliged to ensure that the place, when it is accessible by the public, is safe and free from risk. This duty of care requires there to be a certain level of cleanliness, tidiness and warning of potential hazards. What is defined as a public place?
Supermarkets, parks, pubs, schools, etc. all are designated public places. Essentially, any person that allows members of the public onto their premises has a duty of care to take reasonable responsibility for their safety whilst on their premises. Even public footpaths and roads are considered public places, as they are owned, managed and maintained by the council. Hence, if an accident is the fault of a poorly maintained footpath, it is the council’s responsibility, or lack of duty of care. All owners or management of public places are expected to have public liability insurance. If compensation is sought, much like a car insurance policy, funds are paid from the ins…

Car tax – is it an offence to fail to display a valid tax disc?

(As distinct from paying the relevant rate of tax for the vehicle in question.)***UPDATE***  The law concerning the display of tax discs in vehicles in England and Wales changed on 1 October 2014.  The summary of the legal position in the post below is as the law was in June 2014.Judging from my site stats, there seem to be a lot of drivers out there who are curious on this subject. So I thought a specific post might be in order. I’m helpful like that. :pIt’s generally well known that motorists who use a car (or leave it parked) on a public road must have paid the car tax that applies to their car and display the tax disc on the windscreen. Failing to do so is a criminal offence. I say this because there are numerous comments left on motoring and self-righteous (ahem) self-help forums on the web, confidently asserting that drivers will ‘get done’ for not displaying a valid tax disc for their vehicle when on public roads.Lovely. But where is this set out?The relevant law relating to ca…