Search for: "State v. Ege"
Results 221 - 240
of 430
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Jun 2008, 5:58 pm
Worked but difficult and v e r y slow. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 10:10 am
In many other cases eg involving celebrities though, hacking may have been of already-listened- to voicemails. [read post]
22 Dec 2017, 12:06 am
& another v S.A. [read post]
25 Jun 2010, 5:48 am
In Morrison v. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 12:54 pm
If DHL is to avoid pan-European relief, there must be some cogent ground that can be raised in a country other than France that the prohibition should not be enforced (eg implied licence, estoppel) or DHL must successfully challenge the validity of the Community trade mark. [read post]
28 Dec 2009, 5:15 am
Feld Ent't, 03-2006 EGS, (D.D.C.) was abundantly unfulfilling. [read post]
8 Sep 2009, 7:52 am
See University of Western Australia v Gray 9[2009] FCAFC 116 (3 September 2009)). [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 8:26 am
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decision in the NLC case [Case C-530/12 P OHIM v National Lottery Commission, on which see the earlier IPKat note here; Advocate General Bot’s Opinion, here] attracted a number of comments as to how EU bodies should treat national laws when they are of relevance within EU and national proceedings. [read post]
24 Mar 2013, 11:41 am
The judge stated that counsel should be able to deal with at least some of these from their own notes. [read post]
22 Dec 2019, 10:26 am
However, it also emphasised that, even though the legalisation of cannabis for therapeutic and recreational purposes is under discussion across the EU, the consumption and use of cannabis containing THC above a stated threshold remains illegal in most EU Member States. [read post]
27 Jan 2024, 2:29 pm
(Marko Milanovic, ICJ Indicates Provisional Measures in South Africa v. [read post]
22 Feb 2022, 2:18 am
The Court found that the instance in question could be viewed as falling within the margin of appreciation accorded to member states: ‘the choice of the means calculated to secure compliance with article 8 of the Convention in the sphere of the relations of individuals between themselves is in principle a matter that falls within the contracting states’ margin of appreciation’, referencing the Grand Chamber in Bărbulescu v Romania ([125]). [read post]
10 May 2014, 6:51 am
It recalled that protection extends to both literal [the source code and the object code] and non-literal [eg the program's sequence, structure, and organisation, as well as the program's user interface] elements. [read post]
25 Mar 2018, 3:59 am
Should the lens have been different (eg quotation, criticism/review), perhaps a different outcome might have been possible.Finally, reliance on freedom of expression alone appears reserved to quite exceptional cases, and the Versailles court seemed to confirm this point. [read post]
6 Aug 2014, 3:44 am
Apart from the fact that it's cheaper to litigate in than other courts in the jurisdiction, in this case it also offers practical suggestions to the losing defendant (who incidentally represented himself, so often a cause of further problems) as to how he might avoid further legal trouble and reach a modus vivendi with BMW -- a company that has not been timid about litigating to protect its rights [see eg Case C-63/97 BMW v Deenik, the case which incidentally establishes the… [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 2:24 am
Under UK law or even the laws of traditional droit d'auteur traditions, eg Italy, such claim would be more difficult to bring successfully. [read post]
13 Nov 2015, 2:30 am
It is clear(er) that this is to be intended as actual, rather than potential harm [this conclusion also appears supported further by what is stated at paras 48 and 49, as well as 70]. [read post]
11 Nov 2014, 7:38 pm
This would appear to be a strange result (and goes against eg Case T-152/07 Lange Uren v OHIM). [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 1:36 am
In 1997, Strasbourg court was critical of UK interception law in the case of Halford v The United Kingdom (20605/92) [1997] ECHR 32. [read post]
12 Jul 2011, 4:30 am
In 1997, Strasbourg court was critical of UK interception law in the case of Halford v The United Kingdom (20605/92) [1997] ECHR 32. [read post]
