{"title":"R(关于隐私国际的应用)诉调查权法庭[2019]UKSC 22，最高法院","authors":"T. Webb","doi":"10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court. This case revisited the legality of ouster clauses discussed in Anisminic ([1969] 2 AC 147) in the context of the reviewability of decisions made by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.","PeriodicalId":299991,"journal":{"name":"Essential Cases: Public Law","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court\",\"authors\":\"T. Webb\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court. This case revisited the legality of ouster clauses discussed in Anisminic ([1969] 2 AC 147) in the context of the reviewability of decisions made by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.\",\"PeriodicalId\":299991,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Essential Cases: Public Law\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Essential Cases: Public Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Essential Cases: Public Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HE/9780191868306.003.0043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
关键案例:公法在课程教材和关键案例判决之间架起了一座桥梁。本案例文件总结了R(关于隐私国际的适用)诉调查权法庭[2019]UKSC 22，最高法院的事实和决定。本案在调查权力法庭所作决定的可复审性的背景下，重新审视了Anisminic ([1969] 2 AC 147)中所讨论的财产剥夺条款的合法性。该文件还包括作者托马斯·韦伯的支持性评论。
R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court
Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of Privacy International) v Investigatory Powers Tribunal [2019] UKSC 22, Supreme Court. This case revisited the legality of ouster clauses discussed in Anisminic ([1969] 2 AC 147) in the context of the reviewability of decisions made by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
