Search for: "Does I-XX"
Results 21 - 40
of 404
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Apr 2015, 9:25 am
I don't have any opinions on the reasoning yet, but I'm sure I will develop some opinions soon. [read post]
12 Aug 2014, 2:32 am
The CJEU effectively killed as correct law the OHIM-espoused equivalence of the class XX heading wording and “All goods in class XX”. [read post]
27 Jan 2010, 7:27 am
In fact, I'm not sure I've ever seen a third participant have this much impact on the AB's reasoning. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 7:42 am
What I find amazing in every discussion I have seen about Article XX is the failure to read the general exceptions in their context. [read post]
6 Dec 2014, 6:23 am
After the “shitstorm” hit, that the Rolling Stone article about the UVA gang rape wasn’t all it was cracked up to be, I checked the twitter feed of one of my favorite feminists, Amanda Marcotte, who writes for Slate’s XX Factor. [read post]
6 Nov 2010, 7:10 pm
I think I agree with his conclusion that Article XX permits WTO Members to act to prevent foreign harms. [read post]
23 Apr 2020, 12:22 pm
And how does it work in California? [read post]
16 Sep 2016, 11:25 am
Does this statement by one Appellate Body member help clarify things? [read post]
30 Jan 2012, 10:59 am
After a first read of the Appellate Body's reasoning, I think it has not completely closed the door on finding that GATT Article XX could be a defense applied to violations of other non-GATT agreements. [read post]
3 Apr 2023, 1:34 pm
XX, § 3. [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 2:06 pm
For example, Article XIV of the GATS includes specific language on exceptions to the GATS provisions on MFN and national treatment,59 and does not include language similar to that found in Article XX(c), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), or (j). [read post]
1 Nov 2022, 2:06 pm
For example, Article XIV of the GATS includes specific language on exceptions to the GATS provisions on MFN and national treatment,59 and does not include language similar to that found in Article XX(c), (e), (f), (g), (h), (i), or (j). [read post]
18 Jun 2018, 2:37 pm
A review of the Family Court Order reflects that Magdy is paying child support for a child born on XX/XX/2017. [read post]
7 Dec 2017, 5:05 am
I can't think of one. [read post]
20 Jul 2012, 7:16 pm
I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII,XIII, XIV, XV, XVI, XVII, XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV. [read post]
19 Nov 2018, 4:59 am
The whole section of the panel report is worth a read, but I'm going to focus on one of Thailand's arguments: 7.751. [read post]
2 Jul 2014, 8:40 am
Does it cover FET and expropriation? [read post]
22 Apr 2023, 6:00 am
Thus, the complaint is dismissed as to John/Jane Does I-XX as well as NYSIF. [read post]
22 Apr 2023, 6:00 am
Thus, the complaint is dismissed as to John/Jane Does I-XX as well as NYSIF. [read post]
31 Jul 2013, 9:27 am
For example, can a measure found inconsistent with Article 2.1 and/or Article 2.2 of the TBT Agreement be justified under Article XX of the GATT 1994? [read post]
