Search for: "Paras v. State"
Results 2741 - 2760
of 6,183
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Sep 2015, 1:31 pm
¶47. [read post]
9 Sep 2015, 2:49 am
It is not permissible to "mix and match", so to speak, unless the sign to be registered is a collection of individual signs (the situation referred to in para. 107 of Szpunar's opinion). [read post]
8 Sep 2015, 6:40 am
State Bar of Wisconsin, 747 F.2d 407 (U.S. [read post]
6 Sep 2015, 8:03 pm
De Savoye and Beals v. [read post]
4 Sep 2015, 4:24 am
The result is that the dictum by Mrs Justice Proudman in Meltwater, ie that “the test of quality has been re-stated but … not significantly altered by Infopaq” (para 81), possibly (and regrettably) still remains the most explicit stance in this respect. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 1:52 pm
Rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Ricci v DeStefano [92 EPD ¶43,602] controlled it’s analysis of the case, the appeals court found that the challenged plan was valid and that the plaintiff failed to establish that the Department’s justifications for the plan were pretextual (Shea v Kerry, August 7, 2015, 99 EPD ¶45,366). [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 3:26 am
Five-and-a-bit months after the Opinion of Advocate General Wahl was published in Case C-125/14, [here, with Katnote here] in Iron & Smith Kft v Unilever NV, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has delivered its decision, in response to a request for a preliminary ruling from the Hungarian Fővárosi Törvényszék (the Budapest Municipal Court).The facts of the underlying dispute are as follows. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 3:05 am
In doing so, the author also analyses to what extent the decision is in line with the more recent judgment of the ECJ in Kolassa v Barclays Bank. [read post]
1 Sep 2015, 7:47 am
¶44 (quoting State of Minn. v. [read post]
31 Aug 2015, 2:10 pm
’ Complaint ¶ 11 (J.A. 5). [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 1:30 pm
P. 23 and its state-law analogs, courts seem to have a hard time remembering that. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 12:47 pm
Hejslet, 2006 BCCA 34 at para. [read post]
28 Aug 2015, 5:31 am
Under the TCPA, it is `unlawful for any person within the United States, or any person outside the United States if the recipient is within the United States -- (A) to make any call (other than a call made for emergency purposes or made with the prior express consent of the called party) using any automatic telephone dialing system . . . [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 12:47 pm
In today’s case (Tambosso v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 8:31 am
", C-299/99 - Philips v. [read post]
27 Aug 2015, 3:15 am
Mirga v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions; Samin v Westminster City Council, heard 9-10 March 2015. [read post]
23 Aug 2015, 3:49 pm
Dille v. [read post]
20 Aug 2015, 10:08 am
Forty-one of the 47 state members of the HRC nevertheless voted to accept it; the sole negative vote came from the United States, while the five abstentions came from India, Kenya, Ethiopia, Paraguay and Macedonia. [read post]
20 Aug 2015, 1:30 am
The beginning of the story that forms the basis for the preliminary ruling of the CJEU in Diageo Brands BV v. [read post]
19 Aug 2015, 1:30 am
The Supreme Court in R (Tigere) v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills [2015] UKSC 57 held by a 3:2 majority that the blanket requirement that all applicants for a student loan have “indefinite leave to remain” is discriminatory and must be amended by the Government. [read post]
