Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 3181 - 3200
of 4,765
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Aug 2021, 2:00 am
Todd v. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 12:20 pm
The Court’s decision in Defender Security Co. v. [read post]
24 Mar 2021, 7:05 am
., v. [read post]
24 Mar 2021, 7:05 am
., v. [read post]
6 Jul 2016, 7:52 am
As ProPublica wrote, In return for a measure of a security, workers gave up their right to sue their employers — even in cases of gross negligence — protecting businesses from lawsuit judgments that could bankrupt them. [read post]
17 May 2012, 2:59 am
Apple, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Jan 2022, 4:01 pm
This Round Up covers developments since the last round up on 20 December 2021. [read post]
1 Mar 2014, 6:22 am
By 2003, the number increased to "up to 20 million men." [read post]
12 Oct 2020, 8:05 pm
Kennedy, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, this year I also assigned two other readings: a 1998 article co-written by Amy V. [read post]
5 Nov 2019, 4:00 am
It is arguable that protecting clients against dishonest professionals through a compensation fund is not so clearly in the interest of the honest professionals who end up paying for the dishonesty of a small minority. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 3:38 am
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk has said facial recognition could create “mass surveillance of our public spaces, destroying any concept of privacy. [read post]
22 Mar 2023, 9:50 am
Sometimes, it’s up to the courts to decide. [read post]
14 Aug 2011, 12:47 pm
(“[t]he [old] statute, which it is claimed the defendant violated, only protects a hotel keeper for lodging, food and accommodations furnished, and in so far as the bar bill is for liquors no recovery can be had therefore. [read post]
25 Jan 2007, 9:16 am
[IPKat comment - more explicit acknowledgment than in Arsenal v Reed ECJ that a trade mark has functions other than the origin function]BMW and referential use*The scenario in BMW v Deenik, where use on services which were different to the goods for which the mark was registered and yet Art.5(1)(a) infringement was found was limited to situations in which the defendant is using the trade mark to identify the subject-matter of the services. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 9:15 am
Kettenbach v. [read post]
17 Jan 2022, 10:53 am
Mean-while, consumers lose out. [read post]
25 Jan 2018, 9:30 am
However, Congress did not act, and in the meantime, the Internet showed up. [read post]
26 Oct 2007, 8:57 am
Supreme Court's decision in Buckeye Check Cashing v. [read post]
17 Oct 2023, 8:43 am
While the costs of a traditional Chapter 11 filing can be prohibitive, a “small business case” bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) can be a cost-effective option. [read post]
29 May 2019, 6:59 am
Only a third of what passengers pay ends up in drivers’ pockets. [read post]
