Links & Law - Information about legal aspects of search engines, linking and framing

Hyperlink & Search Engine Law News  Decisions & Court Documents Worldwide Legal Resources (Hyperlink & Search Engine Law Articles) Linking Law Cases Search Engine Law Publications by Dr. Stephan Ott Technical    Background

 

 

Nottinghamshire County Council - JET Report Decision

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE - CHANCERY DIVISION

HIS HONOUR JUDGE BOGGIS QC

3RD DAY OF JUNE 1997

IN AN ACTION INTENDED TO BE BETWEEN


NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL Intended Plaintiff

-and-

(1) JOHN GWATKIN
(2) NICK ANNING
(3) DAVID HEBDITCH
(4) MARGARET JERVIS Proposed Defendants

ORDER FOR AN INJUNCTION BEFORE THE ISSUE OF A WRIT OF SUMMONS

IMPORTANT:- NOTICE TO THE INTENDED DEFENDANTS ("the Defendants")
(1) This Order prohibits you from doing the acts set out in this Order. You should read it all carefully. You are advised to consult a solicitor as soon as possible. You have a right to ask the Court to vary or discharge this Order.
(2) If you disobey this Order you may be found guilty of Contempt of Court and may be sent to prison or fined or your assets may be seized.

An Application was made on the 3rd June 1997 by Counsel for Nottinghamshire County Council (who is to be the Plaintiff in an Action against John Gwatkin, Nick Anning, David Hebditch and Margaret Jervis who are proposed to be the First Defendant, Second Defendant, Third Defendant and Fourth Defendant respectively) to the Judge who heard the Application supported by the draft affidavit listed in Schedule 1 and accepted the undertakings in Schedule 2 at the end of this Order.
IT IS ORDERED that up to and including the 9th day of June 1997 ("the Return Date") :-
(1) The First Defendant must not until after judgment or further Order in the meantime and whether acting by himself, his servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever from doing the following act or any of them that is to say.

(1) authorising the reproduction of the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report of Nottinghamshire County Council and Nottinghamshire Constabulary dated June 1990 or any part thereof without the licence of the Plaintiff;

(2) sell, supply or offer or expose for sale or supply, publish, disseminate, disclose or howsoever deal with the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report dated June 1990.

(3) sell, supply or offer or expose for sale or supply, publish, disseminate, disclose or howsoever deal with information contained in the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report dated June 1990 relating to the respective case histories and/or relating to the identities of the respective children identified therein

2. The Second Defendant must not until after judgment or further Order in the meantime and whether acting by himself, his servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever do the following act or any of them that is to say.

(1) reproduce the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report of Nottinghamshire County Council and Nottinghamshire Constabulary dated June 1990 or any part thereof without the licence of the Plaintiff;

(2) sell, supply or offer or expose for sale or supply, publish, disseminate, disclose or howsoever deal with information contained in the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report dated June 1990 relating to the respective case histories and/or relating to the identities of the respective children identified therein.

3. The Third Defendant must not until judgment or further Order in the meantime and whether acting by himself, his servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever from doing the following act or any of them that is to say.

(1) reproduce the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report of Nottinghamshire County Council and Nottinghamshire Constabulary dated June 1990 or any part thereof without the licence of the Plaintiff;

(2) sell, supply or offer or expose for sale or supply, publish, disseminate, disclose or howsoever deal with information contained in the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report dated June 1990 relating to the respective case histories and/or relating to the identities of the respective children identified therein.

4. The Fourth Defendant must not until judgment or further Order in the meantime and whether acting by herself, her servants or agents or any of them or otherwise howsoever from doing the following act or any of them that is to say.

(1) reproduce the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report of Nottinghamshire County Council and Nottinghamshire Constabulary dated June 1990 or any part thereof without the licence of the Plaintiff;

(2) sell, supply or offer or expose for sale or supply, publish, disseminate, disclose or howsoever deal with information contained in the Revised Joint Enquiry Team Report dated June 1990 relating to the respective case histories and/or relating to the identities of the respective children identified therein .

VARIATION OR DISCHARGE OF THIS ORDER
The First Defendant and/or Second Defendant and/or Third Defendant and/or Fourth Defendant may apply to the Court at any time to vary or discharge this Order but if they wish to do so they must first inform the Plaintiff's solicitors in writing.

AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED:
(1) that the Third Defendant and the Fourth Defendant may be served by electronic mail transmission from the Plaintiff’s offices to dlheb@globalnet. co.uk and to mj@globalnet.co.uk respectively;

(2) that the Second Defendant may be served by electronic mail transmission to the address above of the Third Defendant;

NAME AND ADDRESS OF PLAINTIFF'S SOLICITORS
The Plaintiff's solicitors are:-

County Solicitor of County Hall, West Bridgford, Nottingham, NG7 2QP

Telephone Number in office hours : 0115 977 3967
Telephone Number out of office hours : 0115 977 3967

INTERPRETATION OF THIS ORDER
1) In this Order the words "he" "him" or "his" include "she" or "her" and "it" or "its".
2) Where there are two or more Defendants then (unless the contrary appears)
(a) References to "the Defendant" mean both or all of them;
(b) An Order requiring "the Defendant" to do or not to do anything requires each Defendant to do or not to do it;
(c) A requirement relating to service of this Order or of any legal proceedings on "the Defendant" means on each of them.
THE EFFECT OF THIS ORDER
1) A Defendant who is an individual who is ordered not to do something must not do it himself or in any other way. He must not do it through others acting on his behalf or on his instructions or with his encouragement.
2) A Defendant which is a corporation and which is ordered not to do something must not do it itself or by its directors, officers, employees, or agents or in any other way.
SCHEDULE 1.
Affidavits
The Plaintiff relied on the following affidavits:
1) Draft Affidavit of Martin Eaden
SCHEDULE 2.
Undertakings given to the Court by the Plaintiff
1) If the Court later finds that this Order has caused loss to the Defendant, and decides that the First Defendant and/or Second Defendant and/or Third Defendant and/or Fourth Defendant should be compensated for that loss, the Plaintiff will comply with any Order the Court may make.
2) As soon as practicable the Plaintiff will issue and serve on the First Defendant and/or Second Defendant and/or Third Defendant and/or Fourth Defendant a Writ of Summons substantially in the form of the draft Writ produced to the Court and initialled by the Judge claiming appropriate relief together with this Order.
(3) As soon as practicable the Plaintiff will serve on the First Defendant and/or Second Defendant and/or Third Defendant and/or Fourth Defendant a Notice of Motion for the Return Date together with a copy of the Affidavit and Exhibits containing the evidence relied on by the Plaintiff.] as\cjf\broxtowe.ord
CH 1997 N No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
CHANCERY DIVISION
BIRMINGHAM DISTRICT REGISTRY

NOTTINGHAMSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

-and-

(1) JOHN GWATKIN
(2) NICK ANNING
(3) DAVID HEBDITCH
(4) MARGARET JERVIS

ORDER FOR INJUNCTION


 

back to the overview

Overview

This section contains Court Decisions concerning linking, framing and search engine issues. Featured are decisons from Germany, other European countries and from the USA and Canada.

 

Latest News - Update 71

Legal trouble for YouTube in Germany

Germany: Employer may google job applicant

EU: Consultation on the E-Commerce-Directive

WIPO Paper on tradmarks and the internet

The ECJ and the AdWords Cases

 

 

Masthead/Curriculum Vitae
Copyright © 2002-2008 Dr. Stephan Ott 

All Rights Reserved.

 

Google