Search for: "ENGLISH v. STATE"
Results 2001 - 2020
of 6,448
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Apr 2018, 9:16 am
As I explained in my post about Oil States Energy Services v. [read post]
15 Aug 2012, 5:28 pm
See People v. [read post]
16 May 2011, 3:22 pm
A more detailed post will follow.* I had previously stated, erroneously, that the arbitration clause between the parties designated English law as the law governing the arbitration. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 7:30 am
FCC v. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 7:30 am
FCC v. [read post]
24 May 2016, 1:49 pm
The Economic Loss Rule and the Ability to Sue Design Professionals without a Contract A recent Maryland case, Balfour Beatty Infrastructure, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 1:35 am
Snyder v. [read post]
28 Mar 2023, 5:00 am
In the case of Galette v. [read post]
25 Oct 2011, 4:31 am
Lord Eassie went on to state at para. 48 of the Court’s judgment: “. . . we for our part do not see any reason why in ordinary, contemporary English usage ‘leave’ in this context should not simply connote a period in which the employee is free from work commitment. [read post]
18 Feb 2009, 7:47 am
Drawing on United States v. [read post]
21 Apr 2017, 1:39 pm
The court notes that, during the sign-up process, an alert states “BY CREATING AN UBER ACCOUNT, YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF SERVICE & PRIVACY POLICY. [read post]
20 Jun 2014, 6:59 am
Following Advocate General Sharpston’s opinion, the Court stated that the InfoSoc Directive, which confers a more generous protection to TPMs than the Software Directive, should govern TPMs used in videogames. [read post]
27 Jun 2013, 3:59 pm
There is no reason why the English court could not do the same. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Community Assn. v New York State Urban Dev. [read post]
10 Jun 2024, 6:00 am
Community Assn. v New York State Urban Dev. [read post]
20 Jan 2019, 11:43 pm
See United States v. [read post]
2 Jul 2010, 10:41 am
In a 1993 decision called R. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2009, 8:22 pm
In Romania, the “u” at the end of the name is the same as “son” in English. [read post]
1 Jun 2016, 10:48 am
On one hand, United States Army Corps of Engineers v. [read post]
12 May 2012, 4:11 am
(2) If the court should have examined whether to refuse enforcement under Section 48(1)(a) for the reasons stated, has the Delhi High Court impliedly followed the Supreme Court in reading public policy in a wider manner (See, Phulchand Exports Ltd. v. [read post]
