Sentences with phrase «disclosure was in the public interest»

Appleby has said a hacker had stolen its files and argued that none of the journalistic disclosures were in the public interest.

What was relevant was the worker's belief that the disclosure was in the public interest and that belief being objectively reasonable.

Not exact matches

It is interesting that much of the growth in income of the top 1 % has come in the form of eageincome which is practically impossible to hide (because employers have reporting and withholding obligations in the tax system and, at least for large public companies, often have public disclosure obligations for their senior CEOs).

If both businesses and law enforcement give prompt, upfront disclosure of what technology is being used and in what manner, it will make it easier for startups to do business and help ease people's concerns, says Tamir Israel, a staff lawyer with the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic at the University of Ottawa.

In a recent op - ed in the Edmonton Journal, Public Interest Alberta «s Larry Booi called on the new NDP government to institute campaign spending limits, lower contribution limits to $ 1,200 per year, impose much stronger rules on disclosure of contributions and spending and extend the rules on contributions and spending to cover party leadership and constituency contestIn a recent op - ed in the Edmonton Journal, Public Interest Alberta «s Larry Booi called on the new NDP government to institute campaign spending limits, lower contribution limits to $ 1,200 per year, impose much stronger rules on disclosure of contributions and spending and extend the rules on contributions and spending to cover party leadership and constituency contestin the Edmonton Journal, Public Interest Alberta «s Larry Booi called on the new NDP government to institute campaign spending limits, lower contribution limits to $ 1,200 per year, impose much stronger rules on disclosure of contributions and spending and extend the rules on contributions and spending to cover party leadership and constituency contests.

«The fact and the details of the investigation which the BBC published to the world at large, along with the video footage of his apartment being searched, were private information and there was no public interest in the disclosure of this information to the millions of viewers and website readers around the world to whom it was published.

I'm proud to join with Leader Andrea Stewart - Cousins and the entire Democratic Conference in calling on the State Senate to defend the public interest by bringing my tax disclosure bills to a vote this session, as is happening in 28 other state houses across the nation.»

The Nigerian government has an obligation to balance whether the risk of harm to the legitimate aim (that is secrecy of ongoing corruption investigation and presumption of innocence) from disclosure of the names of public officials is greater than the public interest in accessing the information.»

The Principle 4 (2) provides: «Access to a document may be refused if the disclosure of the information contained in the official document would or would be likely to harm any of the interests mentioned in paragraph 1, unless there is an overriding public interest in disclosure.»

Making the disclosure on Tuesday, the Special Assistant to the Governor on Public Communications and New Media, Lere Olayinka, said that Governor Fayose, in a letter addressed to leaders of the PDP, declared that his ambition to be president was without prejudice to the party's position, but in the overall interest of the party and Nigeria.

«I think at the end of the day our conference will support transparency, disclosure that is reasonable that is in the best interest of the public,» he said.

As a consequence, in September, the BHA complained to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), who in July this year ruled that the public interest was in favour of disclosure.

His «judgment», in this case, was that the damage disclosure would cause «far outweighs any corresponding public interest» in actually revealing the content of the minutes.

Laws are in place to ensure that such outside income does not create a conflict - of - interest for the lawmakers — laws require a combination of requirements that lawmakers recuse themselves of decisions which may directly affect their wealth, prohibit them from using their office for personal gain, and by requiring the disclosure of the sources of outside income in order to ensure that the public — and regulatory agencies — can monitor lawmakers» behavior.

If developers were interested in a well - maintained property with ready railroad access, their inquiries didn't rise to public disclosure.

Ministers should be as open as possible with Parliament and the public, refusing to provide information only when disclosure would not be in the public interest which should be decided in accordance with the relevant statutes and the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Groups have been abusing public disclosure laws, the legal defense fund said in the amicus brief, «to harass scientists whose findings — or entire fields of study — they perceive as threatening their financial interests and ideological beliefs.»

The E&E Legal Institute then weighed in, responding to the claims of the university and the public record's custodian in stating that it is in the public interest to ensure «transparency» of academic research that taxpayers finance and that the state's public record laws allow for such public disclosure.

The authors found that companies pay a price in going public: having to answer to stockholders, who generally are more interested in the short run than the long run, and having now to file cumbersome disclosure reports, companies often find that there is less room for risky and potentially revolutionary innovations.

Davies argues that the description suggests that Soon, who has been active in public policy debates, should have acknowledged Southern's support in his papers — and that, in some cases, journal conflict - of - interest policies appear to require such disclosure.

Before a single child's information is turned over to any 3rd party, policymakers should give assurance to parents and educators that no harm will come to Tennessee school children by adopting the following principles: The state and districts should be required to publish any and all existing data sharing agreements in printed and electronic form, and include a thorough explanation of its purpose and provisions, and make it available to parents and local school authorities statewide; The Department of Education should hold hearings throughout the state or testify before the legislature to explain any existing data agreement, and answer questions from the public or their representatives, obtain informed comment, and gauge public reaction; All parents should have the right to be notified of the impending disclosure of their children's data, and provide them with a right to consent or have the right to withhold their children's information from being shared; The state should have to define what rights families or individuals will have to obtain relief if harmed by improper use or release of their child's private information, including how claims can be made; and finally, any legislation must ensure that the privacy interest of public school children and their families are put above the interests of any 3rd Party and its agents and subsidiaries.

«The charter is working on a more comprehensive and detailed response to the board's denial of the petition and will provide this to the district and public in the interests of full disclosure.

The department has claimed that the results are exempt because they are preliminary data and «the public interest in withhold documents outweighs the public interest in disclosure.»

These drafts are exempt if «the public agency has determined that the public interest in withholding such documents clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure.»

Borrowers interested in Balboa Capital's term loans should note that the company requires a UCC - 1 filing, which is a public disclosure that acts as a lien on the borrowing entity's assets.

The 13 (f) rule allows the SEC to delay disclosure that is «necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors.»

The purpose behind these guidelines is to promote (i) honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships; (ii) full, fair, accurate, timely, and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that the Trust files with, or submits to, the SEC and in other public communications made by the Funds; (iii) compliance with applicable governmental laws, rule and regulations; (iv) the prompt internal reporting of violations of the Trust Code to an appropriate person or persons identified in the Trust Code; and (v) accountability for adherence to the Trust Code.

In order to not disclose information under EIR, we need to have a valid exception, and then also pass a public interest test that shows that the public interest is better served by non-disclosure than disclosure.

It is undoubtedly in the public interest for there to be full disclosure of the measurements upon which climate scientists are basing their conclusions.

In June, EELI's request for financial disclosure statements from members of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) was denied because «the harm to the individuals... clearly outweighs the public interest in such disclosure.&raquIn June, EELI's request for financial disclosure statements from members of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) was denied because «the harm to the individuals... clearly outweighs the public interest in such disclosure.&raquin such disclosure.»

This hearing comes at a time when there is burgeoning diverse and bipartisan support for ending anonymous companies in the U.S. Major financial institutions, national security experts, law enforcement organizations, anti-human trafficking groups and public interest organizations have all endorsed legislation that would require the disclosure of the real people who own American companies.

129 In the third place, as regards the argument that the disclosure of documents relating to the ACTA could only have reinforced the public interest with regard to international relations and avoid controversy arising from the leaked publication of certain proposals, it should be noted that, while it is true that the purpose of Regulation No 1049/2001 is to ensure maximum transparency by giving the fullest possible effect to the right of public access to documents of the European Union (recital 4 of the regulation), it nevertheless provides exceptions to the right of access to protect certain public or private interests, and in the present case, the public interest as regards international relationIn the third place, as regards the argument that the disclosure of documents relating to the ACTA could only have reinforced the public interest with regard to international relations and avoid controversy arising from the leaked publication of certain proposals, it should be noted that, while it is true that the purpose of Regulation No 1049/2001 is to ensure maximum transparency by giving the fullest possible effect to the right of public access to documents of the European Union (recital 4 of the regulation), it nevertheless provides exceptions to the right of access to protect certain public or private interests, and in the present case, the public interest as regards international relationin the present case, the public interest as regards international relations.

While the panel took into account «the investment in these proceedings, in terms of time, emotion and money and the genuine public interest and importance in knowing the findings of the panel in respect of the allegations which have been made,» it found that the disclosure failings were «an abuse of the process which is of such seriousness that it offends the panel's sense of justice and propriety».

According to the Scarth report (In PDF), since the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) was proclaimed in 2007, the vast majority of disclosures have been made to the ombudsmaIn PDF), since the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) was proclaimed in 2007, the vast majority of disclosures have been made to the ombudsmain 2007, the vast majority of disclosures have been made to the ombudsman.

[In] so far as the applicant's argument seeks, in essence, to invoke, in the present case, an overriding public interest in disclosure, it should be noted that the exceptions to the right to access under Article 4 (1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 are mandatory exceptions, unlike other exceptions to the right to access, and do not make any reference to the consideration of such an interesIn] so far as the applicant's argument seeks, in essence, to invoke, in the present case, an overriding public interest in disclosure, it should be noted that the exceptions to the right to access under Article 4 (1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 are mandatory exceptions, unlike other exceptions to the right to access, and do not make any reference to the consideration of such an interesin essence, to invoke, in the present case, an overriding public interest in disclosure, it should be noted that the exceptions to the right to access under Article 4 (1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 are mandatory exceptions, unlike other exceptions to the right to access, and do not make any reference to the consideration of such an interesin the present case, an overriding public interest in disclosure, it should be noted that the exceptions to the right to access under Article 4 (1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 are mandatory exceptions, unlike other exceptions to the right to access, and do not make any reference to the consideration of such an interesin disclosure, it should be noted that the exceptions to the right to access under Article 4 (1)(a) of Regulation No 1049/2001 are mandatory exceptions, unlike other exceptions to the right to access, and do not make any reference to the consideration of such an interest.

Subsequently, the General Court refuted the argument set out above because it is in fact possible «that the disclosure of European Union positions in international negotiations could damage the protection of the public interest as regards international relations.»

That provision requires the Commission to refuse access to a document «where disclosure would undermine the protection of the purpose of inspections, investigations and audits, unless there is an overriding public interest in disclosure.»

As a rule, disclosure may only be refused on the basis of a limited set of exceptions found in Regulation (EC) no 1049/2001 (hereinafter the Transparency Regulation), to be interpreted restrictively and subject to the absence of an overriding public interest in disclosure.

It is in practice effectively impossible to argue for the existence of an overriding public interest for the purposes of justifying disclosure when the contents of the documents are not known.

Acknowledging the existence of such a public interest would not automatically lead to full transparency, since the Regulation still allows for balancing this interest with possible harm from disclosure, which in a politically sensitive situation can be high.

Nevertheless, the judgment presents a confusing and unfortunate interpretation of the Transparency Regulation in categorically denying the existence of a public interest in disclosure, which could be deemed to exist specifically because the matter was high on the political agenda.

There is a public interest in ensuring that when, as here, parties arrive at an agreement on disclosure to avoid litigation, such that disclosure is volunteered on terms that include a protective order, the terms of the protective order not be modified unless there is a compelling reason to do so.

In Pulse Data the ASC declined to exercise its public interest jurisdiction to cease trade a shareholder rights plan, primarily because a large majority of the shareholders of the issuer had voted to adopt the plan at a time where the take - over bid was pending with full disclosure of the implications of the shareholder rights plan.

Specifically, setting the bar at «balance of probabilities plus» might encourage employers to settle otherwise unmeritorious claims where an interim order has been made (following a necessarily incomplete and superficial examination of the evidence and the parties» respective positions); and give successful employees unrealistic expectations as they move towards the full hearing, especially bearing in mind the absence of a statutory compensation cap in public interest disclosure cases.

It stressed that both the law enforcement and solicitor - client privilege exemptions are based on recognized public interests and, furthermore, that institutions must consider the public interest in favour of disclosure in applying their discretion.

Whether the conditions for the making of a disclosure order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 existed or did not exist was essentially a question of fact, the question being whether there were «reasonable grounds for believing» that the material relied upon by the Serious Organised Crime Agency was likely to be of substantial value and that it was in the public interest that the material should be produced or that access to it should be given having regard to: (a) the benefit likely to accrue to the civil recovery investigation if the material was obtained; and (b) the circumstances under which the person concerned had any of the material in his possession, power or control (criteria (a) and (b)-RRB-.

Nicholas has particular expertise in handling heavyweight criminal cases where there are substantial issues in relation to disclosure and public interest immunity.

Holman J came to that conclusion notwithstanding that, in Eisai, counsel for NICE had conceded (Eisai, [59]-RRB- that, in any action against it for breach of confidence in respect of such a disclosure, a public interest defence would be available to it if fairness required that the information be disclosed.

But professional regulatory hearings also bear some similarity to criminal proceedings as well: regulatory bodies are statutory bodies that perform a governmental function and are subject to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; they operate in the public interest; and they owe the same disclosure obligations of the Crown under Stinchcombe.

Documents and information that the Competition Bureau collects from third parties during its investigations are protected by public interest privilege from disclosure to plaintiffs in private actions, the BC Supreme... [more] Full article