Search for: "London v. State" Results 2181 - 2200 of 3,591
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 May 2011, 6:12 am by J. Michael Goodson Law Library
As the London Times explained in 2004, those samples are legally considered the cultural property of the recipient government, and other samples located in the U.S. are classified as national treasure under NASA Policy Directive 7100.10D (since renumbered as NPD 7100.10E).Over the last four decades, many of the goodwill gifts have made their way to the black market, and some have also made their way to the courts: check out the descriptively-named case of U.S. v. [read post]
20 Mar 2008, 8:49 pm
One important factor contributing to the change is attributable to State Street Bank and Trust Co. v. [read post]
27 Dec 2018, 12:15 pm
  ["A recent case worth noting is University of Southern California v. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 9:26 am by Aditi Shah
In reaching this conclusion, the Ninth Circuit primarily applied the framework in Boumediene v. [read post]
9 Jun 2010, 4:48 am
LEXIS 38 (Iowa May 7, 2010). http://tinyurl.com/22r6q4y Mainfreight United States Partnership v. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 5:49 pm by INFORRM
Henderson v Hackney London Borough Council & Anor [2010] EWHC 1651 (QB), QBD – 6 Jul 2010. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 3:20 pm by Patrick
United States and its progeny Debs v. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 2:25 pm by NL
The Court of Appeal noted that it was extremely unlikely that the draughtsman of the 1995 Act had used the term enjoyment in a more extensive manner than that set out by the House of Lords in Southwark London Borough Council v Tanner & Others [2001] 1 AC. [read post]
28 May 2017, 4:03 pm by INFORRM
On 24 May 2017 in the case of Mohareb v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd (No 3) [2017] NSWSC 645) McCallum J refused leave to plead a claim against the State on the basis of vicarious liability for a statement of the Attorney-General which was republished in the media. [read post]
5 Nov 2018, 5:03 am
The three that were particularly considered concerned:Corkscrews - El Hogar Perfecto V OHIM (T-337/12);Umbrellas - Senz Technologies BV v OHIM, (T-22/13 and T-23/13); andBiscuits - Biscuits Poult SA v OHIM (T-494/12).We were reminded that the only relevant sense to design law is sight. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 2:43 am by Melina Padron
BM v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 366 (05 April 2011) Court of Appeal: Control order against terrorist suspect was flawed. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 11:00 am by Benjamin Wittes
 The High Court’s decision in Serdar Mohammed v Secretary of State for Defence (2015) further stretched the ECHR’s reach to Afghanistan. [read post]