Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
                  I continue to research and read about the approach of the Court of Justice and courts in other EU states relating to anonymisation and what has been termed "pseudonymisation".� The former completely obscures personal information in an irreversible manner so that there is no chance of recovering while pseudonymisation partially identifies a personal datum with a possibility of tracing it back to its original form.� Pseudonymisation is the current practice among many EU member states.
                  The Court in exercising its jurisdiction as sought has identified earlier in this judgment, the interests which require a departure from the rule of administration of justice in public.�
                  So what I will do then is repeat the order which was proposed by the Court earlier this morning for the parties to consider with a few slight amendments to take account of the submissions made by counsel; that is the Court today makes the following "order pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the Court in the interests of protecting the reputations and privacy of students who are not represented in these proceedings while recognising the fundamental right to freedom of information:-
(1)    Direct that these proceeding will henceforth be entitled "M.M. v A University";
(2)    That the publication on courts.ie, the world wide web and public media fora concerning these proceedings be restricted from:-
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.