Search for: "French v. French"
Results 3601 - 3620
of 4,623
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jun 2017, 4:52 pm
Canada In the case of Leduc v Houda-Pepin 2017 QCCQ 5661 (French) the Quebec Court has awarded a former mayor Can$24,000 damages against a political opponent for a libel during a provincial election campaign in 2014. [read post]
1 Jan 2020, 4:24 pm
The YouTube and Uploaded cases (C-682/18 Petersongs v YouTube and C-683/18 Elsevier v Cyando) pending from the German Federal Supreme Court include questions around the communication to the public right, as do C-392/19 VG Bild-Kunst v Preussischer Kulturbesitz (Germany, BGH), C-442/19 Brein v News Service Europe (Netherlands, Supreme Court) and C-597/19 Mircom v… [read post]
14 Mar 2011, 2:31 am
In A.B. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2010, 9:13 am
Judgment in Khader v Aziz, was given on 23 June 2010. [read post]
23 Jan 2023, 4:34 pm
By Nikki Vafai. [read post]
15 May 2019, 10:06 pm
Cecilia Sbrolli re-imagines the decision in the case Fuller v. [read post]
3 Jan 2019, 7:35 am
State v. [read post]
14 Nov 2013, 9:00 am
Elmar Wolf opposed, pointing to a number of earlier French and international word and figurative trade marks. [read post]
19 Jun 2013, 4:30 am
Cox v. [read post]
18 Apr 2023, 7:07 pm
They could still identify Sisvel v. [read post]
29 Sep 2020, 11:24 am
Peterson, testified in FTC v. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 6:17 am
In the 1994 case of Carter v. [read post]
6 May 2015, 10:53 am
In the recent case of Depuy Orthopaedics v. [read post]
5 Mar 2021, 4:00 am
See, Marbury v. [read post]
16 Dec 2015, 11:56 am
I used radiograph pens, french curves and triangles. [read post]
10 Sep 2013, 8:45 am
Though we don’t often include citations here, you should make a note of this case: French v. [read post]
1 Apr 2024, 12:16 am
A cautionary example of such a situation is the recent General Court judgment in Lidl Stiftung v EUIPO - MHCS (Nuance de la couleur orange) (T-652/22) concerning the orange colour trade mark for the Veuve Clicquot champagne. [read post]
19 May 2016, 6:37 am
Because the Regulation merely limited the "use" of trade marks they did not strip away the trade mark owner;s right to prevent or exclude others from using their mark (citing Arnold J in Pinterest v Premium Interest). [read post]
28 Jul 2020, 4:22 am
In this connection, he briefly discussed the case, 3M company v KM Brothers, involving the sale of N95 masks on Amazon at costs exceeding 3M’s list prices. [read post]
23 Sep 2023, 11:26 am
Woolf v. [read post]
