From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
|
|
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received a quality rating on the assessment scale. |
| ??? |
This article has not yet received an importance assessment on the assessment scale. |
|
This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.
|
[edit] Gigantic sentence
Although initially the case against the paper was deemed to be covered by section 10 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, the judgement was almost immediately overturned on appeal, on the grounds that although the document itself was harmless, a civil servant capable of leaking it might leak others which were not. This really needs to be cleaned up! It doesn't explain what case was brought initially by the Crown, what happened to that case? was there another case? what happened? The sequence is muddled into one gigantic sentence. --Red King 23:33, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
- Now revamped into bite-sized portions!Phase4 19:15, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
