Search for: "State v. Dominic"
Results 3101 - 3120
of 4,510
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 Jul 2012, 4:31 am
On 7 June 2012, in the case Centro Europa 7 S.r.l. and Di Stefano v. [read post]
10 Jul 2012, 2:11 am
But it’s the lawyers who are dominant in business in the United States*. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 11:28 am
In Paz v. [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 9:30 pm
South African case law that has referred to European decisions that have caused the UKIPO to summarise the Principles as they have been referred to above include Adcock Ingram v Cipla Medpro (Sabel v Puma), Laugh it off Promotions v SAB (Canon v MGM), Puma v Global Warming (Marca Mode v Adidas) and Cowbell v ICS Holdings (Canon v MGM). [read post]
8 Jul 2012, 6:24 am
(My thanks to IntLawGrrls for the opportunity to contribute this introductory post) Earlier this year, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued its decision in Atala v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:29 pm
The summary of GE v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 7:12 am
The ACLU praised last week’s opinion in United States v. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 8:53 am
Briefly: Stanley Fish has a column on United States v. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 3:25 pm
Maybe the best example I can think of is 1974, U.S. v. [read post]
4 Jul 2012, 10:19 am
Eventually, the transformative law (or laws) come before a Supreme Court dominated by Justices of the opposite party. [read post]
2 Jul 2012, 5:05 am
Barson v. [read post]
30 Jun 2012, 10:52 am
In Cory v. [read post]
29 Jun 2012, 3:28 am
[In the following post, our guest contributor Rahul Singh analyzes the impact of CCI’s order in Builders Association of India v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 12:50 pm
A major class action lawsuit, Hensley v. [read post]
28 Jun 2012, 8:43 am
The 2006 ruling in Cameron v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 1:09 pm
Even though the Act created a proprietary regime in which the condominium corporation has a dominant role, that regime does not eliminate the contractual regime arising from the contract made by each unit purchaser with the developer. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 12:14 am
Liverpool City Council v Kassim [2011] UKUT 169 (LC)A thank you to the EHP who brought our attention to this case. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 12:14 am
Liverpool City Council v Kassim [2011] UKUT 169 (LC)A thank you to the EHP who brought our attention to this case. [read post]
24 Jun 2012, 3:41 am
The lack of clear guidance does however mean that viable claims are frequently rejected out of hand for apparently encompassing statutory excluded subject-matter, especially since “non-technical” features may actually form a dominating part of a claim. [read post]
23 Jun 2012, 3:52 am
In respect of violations of sections 3(1) (a) and (b), the CCI examined the following facts and submissions: Market Structure of the Cement Industry: As previously stated, the CCI observed that no player can be said to be dominant in India as per the prevailing market structure. [read post]
