ChatterBank0 min ago
£92,000 Or Just £100, Are The French Lawyers Right?
12 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I'm slightly conflicted in that there isn't really a comparison because Meghan Markle was doing a shoot and Kate wasn't, so one was consented to etc and one was covert. However, we all have choices about our life, and Kate Middleton married Prince William, so she would know her life was going to change significantly, if she didn't then she was stupid, but should that allow the media and individuals unfettered access into her private life? No I don't think it should, however, miserable though it is to be hounded by the press and fans etc you pays your money and takes your choice, she could always have married a plumber.
No, the French lawyers are not right for the reasons already given.
These are two different women, and the photos are contextually different.
Also, this argument doesn’t hold water:
Lawyers for Closer, who are appealing the case this week, say it's 'hypocritical' of the Cambridges to claim such a huge compensation when modern members of the royal family are 'happy with sexy photos'.
The Cambridges sued years ago. They could not have known about the Duchess of Sussex back in 2012, unless they had the keys to a Tardis.
These are two different women, and the photos are contextually different.
Also, this argument doesn’t hold water:
Lawyers for Closer, who are appealing the case this week, say it's 'hypocritical' of the Cambridges to claim such a huge compensation when modern members of the royal family are 'happy with sexy photos'.
The Cambridges sued years ago. They could not have known about the Duchess of Sussex back in 2012, unless they had the keys to a Tardis.
God knows
wait for the judgement
this must have gone to the Cour de cassation
I challenge anyone to say how they decide cases there
much shorter judgement than ENglish - they state the principles and basically then - "and in applying them we find ..."
res judicata there ( if it is decided then it stays decided)
precedent weak ( you said X last year so you must say X this year - they tend not to as it is principle based)
so wait and see
completely different legal system ( code napooleon) and so compoletely different outcomes .....
wait for the judgement
this must have gone to the Cour de cassation
I challenge anyone to say how they decide cases there
much shorter judgement than ENglish - they state the principles and basically then - "and in applying them we find ..."
res judicata there ( if it is decided then it stays decided)
precedent weak ( you said X last year so you must say X this year - they tend not to as it is principle based)
so wait and see
completely different legal system ( code napooleon) and so compoletely different outcomes .....
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.