Search for: "People in Interest of LJ"
Results 241 - 260
of 337
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Jul 2011, 1:26 am
In many ways the most interesting part of the Court of Appeal judgment was the final section in which Thomas LJ posed two questions. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 11:54 pm
The People) ECJ rules in intermediary liability case L’Oreal v eBay (TechnoLlama) (IPKat) (Class 46) EPO: Amazon 1-click application found to lack inventive step (EPLAW) (IP Osgoode) Please join the discussion by adding your comments on any of these stories, and please do let us know if you think we’ve missed something important, or if there is a source you think should be monitored. [read post]
14 Jul 2011, 11:54 pm
The People) ECJ rules in intermediary liability case L’Oreal v eBay (TechnoLlama) (IPKat) (Class 46) EPO: Amazon 1-click application found to lack inventive step (EPLAW) (IP Osgoode) Please join the discussion by adding your comments on any of these stories, and please do let us know if you think we’ve missed something important, or if there is a source you think should be monitored. [read post]
5 Jul 2011, 4:43 pm
It was suggested that it is better to advise a client to get their marketing people to find a better mark that is available, then waiting around or bringing proceedings. [read post]
4 Jul 2011, 8:53 am
However Laws LJ went on to hold that the Upper Tribunal was in fact “the alter ego” of the High Court. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 12:50 am
If that were true, the prosecution of E could send the wrong message to other young people being similarly exploited. [read post]
10 Jun 2011, 1:15 am
It will be interesting to see which line of reasoning the Supreme Court follows. [read post]
22 May 2011, 5:49 am
Democratic bodies may represent the people, but they have a distinct identity which may need protecting. [read post]
5 May 2011, 1:47 am
However, CFAs remain are available for privacy cases and are used by ordinary people whose private information has been wrongfully disclosed and, by people who the media might be interested in, such as prisoners on day release. [read post]
2 May 2011, 12:00 am
Bingham LJ said, “The problems of defining and limiting a tort of privacy are formidable but the present case strengthens my hope that the review now in progress may prove fruitful. [read post]
30 Apr 2011, 2:40 pm
” and in which Carl notes the strong criticism of Mr Hemming by Wall LJ in RP v Nottingham (this is a blog post on which I commented at the time). [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 5:07 pm
Bingham LJ said, “The problems of defining and limiting a tort of privacy are formidable but the present case strengthens my hope that the review now in progress may prove fruitful. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 3:56 am
Enemy of the people – what price water information? [read post]
24 Apr 2011, 5:04 pm
It is, perhaps, worth recalling that last year’s Reuter’s Institute Report on “Privacy, Probity and Public Interest” (almost entirely ignored by the media) showed that most people still regard sex and sexuality as essentially private. [read post]
19 Apr 2011, 5:17 am
Ward LJ rejected this argument. [read post]
11 Apr 2011, 12:00 pm
But reasonable people can disagree on that issue. [read post]
5 Apr 2011, 1:00 am
Certainly the US case law – with its avowed wish to avoid “excessive entanglement” in internal religious affairs – seems to allow for the possibility of (religious) institutional interests being favoured over the individual’s right of access to the court. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 7:26 am
One cannot really say whether there is any public interest in the nature of freedom of competition seriously involved. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 6:00 am
Although agreeing with the reasoning in the lead judgment (by Lord Neuberger MR), Sedley LJ expressed some misgivings about the consequences of it. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 10:59 pm
Smith LJ went further. [read post]
