Search for: "ENGLISH v. STATE"
Results 2121 - 2140
of 7,358
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Feb 2022, 3:00 am
EP 702 had been held to be valid by the English Patents Court. [read post]
17 Jan 2020, 8:56 am
The decision directs us to Lewison J’s comment in Ivax Pharmaceuticals v Akzo Nobel NV [2006] which states that “obstacles to regulatory approval….are not relevant obstacles to an obviousness attack”. [read post]
8 Aug 2019, 12:28 am
Brunetti and the opinion of the AG Bobek in Constantin Film Produktion v. [read post]
12 Aug 2010, 1:47 pm
Arizonans for Official English [v. [read post]
18 Aug 2016, 8:55 am
You think you’re speaking plain English, but they’re just not getting it. [read post]
17 Apr 2019, 9:35 am
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v MM (Scotland) was heard on 9th April. [read post]
11 Dec 2020, 1:53 pm
” The State of Texas filed a complaint in the United States Supreme Court, in an attempt to invoke that court’s original jurisdiction to adjudicate Texas’ complaint that it was harmed by voting procedures in four states in which Trump lost the popular vote. [read post]
10 Feb 2008, 6:23 am
United States v. [read post]
12 Nov 2021, 1:58 pm
(Stevenson Real Estate Services, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 10:00 pm
In proceedings by prisoners subsequently heard in Scotland (Smith v Scott [2007] SC 345), Northern Ireland (R v Secretary of State ex parte Toner and Walsh [1997] NIQB 18) and in England and Wales (Chester v Secretary of State for Justice [2010] EWCA Civ 1439) the relevant Secretary of State has expressly accepted that the ban on prisoner voting is incompatible with the ECHR. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 12:29 pm
The issues are (1) the application of copyright protection under English law to three dimensional works; and (2) whether a claim of an infringement under US copyright law is justiciable in England. [read post]
7 Jul 2020, 9:44 am
An English version of the decision, couresy of Arnold Ruess, can be found here . [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 3:43 am
It is also questionable whether the Court was correct in stating that consumer perception will only be relevant in certain circumstances, when the CJEU stated at least twice in Louboutin (at least in the English translation – see paras 43 and 48) that it was ‘necessary’, in order to determine whether a marketplace operator makes ‘use’ of a sign, to assess consumer perception. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 10:00 am
She had the chance to explain any inconsistencies and Malik gave his evidence to the FtT in English. [read post]
27 Feb 2015, 7:11 am
But Davis v. [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 4:30 am
A few weeks ago, we commented upon the recent Florida case of Farias v. [read post]
31 May 2013, 4:40 am
One officer questioned him in English, after which another officer translated the questions into Spanish. [read post]
16 May 2018, 4:27 am
” At the National Conference of State Legislatures Blog, Lisa Soronen discusses Mount Lemmon Fire District v. [read post]
7 Jul 2014, 10:47 am
A recent decision by the Superior Court of New Jersey, State v. [read post]
29 May 2009, 5:14 am
Midgulf (M) was a trader in sulphur and Groupe Chimiche Tunisien (G) was a company owned by the state of Tunisia. [read post]
