Search for: "Paras v. State"
Results 3301 - 3320
of 6,183
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
26 Mar 2014, 3:25 pm
It was recognized that it may often include the larger multi-national companies (CPR 6.36 and Para 31 of Practice Direction 6B). [read post]
26 Mar 2014, 7:50 am
In this week’s case (Mosimann v. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 5:34 pm
§ 112, ¶ 1.1. [read post]
20 Mar 2014, 12:28 pm
In the first case (Dennis v. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 11:24 am
In January, it was a seven-year long trade mark battle between L’Oréal v eBay before the UK courts (and the CJEU) that bit the dust. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 9:00 am
It has been 15 years since the last brand v brand challenge of a biologic patent in Canada. [read post]
19 Mar 2014, 1:42 am
In addressing the very nature of human rights law, Lord Reed called with approval upon the words of Lord Cooke in R (Daly) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2001] 2 AC 532: “The truth is, I think, that some rights are inherent and fundamental to democratic civilised society. [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 4:00 am
These cases generally fall into two categories: 1) where state conduct compromises the fairness of an accused’s trial (the “main” category); and 2) where state conduct creates no threat to trial fairness but risks undermining the integrity of the judicial process (the “residual” category) (O’Connor, at para. 73). [read post]
16 Mar 2014, 2:24 am
As a result, exact but miniaturised reproductions of artistic works [this was the 1995 Tidy v Trustees of the Natural History Museum case] or colour variations between an original artwork and a reproduction of it [this is the 1999 Pasterfield v Denham decision] may be considered not to infringe the author’s right of integrity.What do readers think of differences in the scope of moral right protection? [read post]
14 Mar 2014, 4:08 pm
(People v. [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 10:03 am
This was the basis of the Georgia Supreme Court's decision in Atlanta Occuplastic Surgery, P.C. v. [read post]
13 Mar 2014, 4:00 am
That to me indicates a state of mind right there that is questionable. [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 3:10 pm
[¶] Subsequent to the appeal herein this identical question was decided in People v. [read post]
12 Mar 2014, 1:54 am
This follows especially from the CJEU decisions in Infopaq [para 35], BSA [paras 45-46], FAPL [para 97], and Painer [para 87]. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 3:06 pm
The case is Telecinco v. [read post]
6 Mar 2014, 7:42 am
Fast forward to 1956, when North Carolina decided to deal with Brown v. [read post]
5 Mar 2014, 5:15 am
¶;¶ 11, 17; Opp. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 2:34 pm
Pelipenko v Russia 16/1/14 We reported the ECtHR’s decision on the merits here. [read post]
3 Mar 2014, 2:34 pm
Pelipenko v Russia 16/1/14 We reported the ECtHR’s decision on the merits here. [read post]
1 Mar 2014, 4:34 am
In the defamation case, Mann v. [read post]
