Search for: "General Produce Co., LTD" Results 361 - 380 of 860
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Mar 2016, 2:56 am by Kevin LaCroix
  “Direct means Direct” generally limits coverage to losses of assets that the insured held in an account for a customer or owned by the insured. [2]   In Cumberland & Erly, LLC v. [read post]
22 Feb 2016, 4:36 pm by Kevin LaCroix
However, interest in purchasing this type of insurance did not develop until 1939, when in New York Dock Co. v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 6:07 am
 This point could be inferred from the reasoning of the Advocate General and the CJEU in Case C-205/13 Hauck GmbH & Co KG v Stokke A/S, which indicated that an important purpose of Article 3(1)(e)(iii) of the Trade Marks Directive was to prevent the use of indefinite trade marks protection to extend the time-limited protection of other intellectual property rights. [read post]
11 Jan 2016, 6:25 am by Rebecca Tushnet
  They communicated a lack of connection to the original producer with a joke about how thisbag wasn’t a Louis Vuitton bag. [read post]
28 Dec 2015, 2:51 am by Ben
 Howard E King, The lawyer for Thicke, WIlliams and co-writer rapper TI, said the decision set a "horrible precedent for music and creativity going forward". [read post]
18 Dec 2015, 9:11 am by Stephanie Smith, Arden Chambers
Interpretation of express term The dispute centred on the interpretation of the service charge clauses contained in those 25 leases (entered into at various times over the years) which generally provided for the lessees to pay to the lessor an annual sum in respect of expenses and outgoings incurred by the lessor for repair and maintenance of the park. [read post]
17 Dec 2015, 3:46 am by INFORRM
Personal injury was argued not to be a proper guide for awarding damages in libel relying on the judgment of Lord Hoffman in the Privy Council in The Gleaner Co Ltd v Abrahams [2004] 1 AC 628. [read post]
13 Dec 2015, 5:42 pm by Angelo A. Paparelli
 As USCIS forecasted in November 2014 (Item 4 in its list), the forthcoming interpretation would “[p]rovide clarity on adjustment [of status] portability [in order] to remove unnecessary restrictions on natural career progression and general job mobility [and] provide relief to workers facing lengthy adjustment delays. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 2:41 pm by Giles Peaker
This case is very different from Beoco Ltd v Alfa Laval Co Ltd [1995] QB 137, on which the Council relies. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 5:00 am
  “It is well settled that a plaintiff must generally show that the defendant’s negligence was a substantial factor in producing the injury to satisfy the burden of proving a prima facie case. [read post]