Search for: "German v. German" Results 2141 - 2160 of 5,198
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Sep 2020, 12:00 am by Peter Ling
If this story sound familiar to Kat readers, it is because similar facts were featured in a landmark CJEU decision of 2011, C-429/08 "Premier League v. [read post]
7 Feb 2022, 4:09 pm by INFORRM
  Nothing about any of this seems to be particularly controversial or European (or, as the current government puts it, ‘Germanic’). [read post]
20 Aug 2012, 9:48 pm by Marta Requejo
THE GERMAN FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT TWO YEARS AFTER LISBON, by Beke Zwingmann Shorter Articles IS THERE A RIGHT TO DETAIN CIVILIANS BY FOREIGN ARMED FORCES DURING A NON-INTERNATIONAL ARMED CONFLICT? [read post]
2 Nov 2015, 1:51 am by INFORRM
The German legislature has passed the highly disputed new German Data Retention Act (“GDRA”). [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 9:19 am by Anastasiia Kyrylenko
GuestKat Thomas Key reported on a recent decision by the US Supreme Court in Allen v. [read post]
26 Feb 2017, 3:31 am
Katfriend Gill Grassie (Brodies LLP) discusses the matter of Tartan Army Ltd v Sett GmbH and Others [2017] CSOH 22. [read post]
1 Feb 2018, 4:41 am
| German ‘hate-speech’ law tries to regulate Facebook and others - will it work? [read post]
5 Sep 2016, 1:10 pm
A closer look at Hospira v Cubist and daptomycin micellesIPKat returns to the Hospira v Cubist case to look in more detail at the claim relating to purifying daptomycin by altering by PH.* My My Mylan: The Trademark Silver Lining for Mylan's EPIPENMylan has recently come under fire for raising the price of the EPIPEN. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 12:15 am
In this case, the act complained of was an offer for sale in England, on the principles laid down in L’Oreal v eBay, i.e. the defendant’s website was not merely accessible from the UK but was in fact targeted at (among others) English customers.The allegedly infringing product on Heritage Audio's sitePassing-offFor passing-off, the judge noted that the CJEU had applied the Brussels I rules not only to trade mark and copyright infringement claims but also to claims based on… [read post]
2 Jan 2011, 4:04 pm by Marie Louise
(Class 99) General Court decision in T-13/09: Holidays sweets not distinctive (Class 46) General Court confirms Lindt chocolate bunny fails distinctiveness test in cases T-336/08, T-346/08 and T-395/08 (Class 46) (Class 46) EPO Board of Appeal decides on inventive step in T 1741/07 concerning system and process for monitoring railway tracks (Kluwer Patent Blog) Germany The BGH and the photographs of Prussian castles: V ZR 45/10, V UR 45/10, V ZR 44/10 (IPKat) Restriction… [read post]