Search for: "Matter of G. C. ," Results 2221 - 2240 of 4,013
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
22 Feb 2014, 4:08 pm by INFORRM
The Court said: “[The journalists] wrote press articles that were published in the Göteborgs-Posten newspaper and on the Göteborgs-Posten website. [read post]
18 Feb 2014, 3:29 pm by Graham Smith
It is common ground between the parties that those articles were freely accessible on the Göteborgs-Posten newspaper site. [read post]
12 Feb 2014, 4:00 am by Administrator
It is a matter of first impression in this court. [read post]
9 Feb 2014, 3:07 pm
It also sought to rely on Wolf Head (Case C-383/12), a decision of the CJEU which was handed down after the trial. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 1:16 pm
But the coach ticket-parlor car metaphor quoted above suggests that the only thing that matters is that the employee remains in the same retirement system. 3. [read post]
4 Feb 2014, 6:07 am by Jamie Markham
(There is a space to schedule such a review on form AOC-CR-619A/B/C, the form used to place the person on G.S. 90-96 probation at the outset.) [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 1:58 am
However, now that it is heading on appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) as Case C-622/13 P, it has regained its pristine topicality -- so here it is.In April 2002 Castel Frères applied to register as a Community trade mark (CTM) the word CASTEL for ‘alcoholic beverages (except beers)’ in Class 33; the word was duly registered as a CTM. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 8:39 am by WSLL
Michael, Attorney General; John G. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 2:03 pm
Furthermore, 11 NYCRR 65-3.5(c) entitles an insurer to receive all items necessary to verify a claim directly from the parties from whom such verification was requested. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 6:22 am
[because] the specific facts alleged fall beyond the scope of the relevant criminal statute, as a matter of statutory interpretation. [read post]
24 Jan 2014, 12:57 am by Kevin LaCroix
Liability may attach if the officer is adjudged in hindsight to have acted outside the scope of his or her delegated authority or to have failed to act on a matter that was not (sic) within his or her expected areas of responsibility.[8]   More recently, five decisions by federal district courts in California ruled that the business judgment rule applies only to independent directors, not officers. [read post]