Search for: "Ace v. State"
Results 21 - 40
of 1,869
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Aug 2014, 3:44 am
Interestingly, the Court of Appeal stated that it was not relevant that AC had been exposed to asbestos whilst working for other employers; this did not affect the fact of IEG’s contractual right to be indemnified under Zurich’s policy (as worded). [read post]
29 Aug 2008, 8:09 am
R (Binyan Mohamed) v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs [2008] EWHC 2048 (Admin); [2008] WLR (D) 295 “The principles set out by the House of Lords in Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners [1974] AC 133 could be applied in novel circumstances to require the Foreign Secretary to disclose information, specific to the claimant and essential to his defence to serious charges which might carry the death penalty, in… [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 1:02 am
Like all good news sources (see, for example, here and here), I am bound to report that the decree nisi in the case of The Nation's Sweetheart v Cashley Cole is due to be pronounced in the Principal Registry this morning. [read post]
28 Mar 2019, 12:45 pm
Door Shop appealed to the State Supreme Court. [read post]
19 Aug 2011, 1:20 pm
[Post by Venkat Balasubramani] State v. [read post]
4 Mar 2013, 6:50 am
D'Amico v. [read post]
8 Jun 2014, 7:53 pm
If a drug company, in 1995, marketed antenatal corticosteroid (ACS) for the prevention of cerebral palsy (CP) in the United States, the government might well have prosecuted the company for misbranding. [read post]
2 Feb 2024, 2:15 am
Lopez v. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 4:27 am
In Secretary of State for Health v Servier Laboratories Ltd, where the loss arose because there were no generic equivalents of the invalidly-patented drug, the Supreme Court held that the "dealing requirement" laid down in OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1, which states that the unlawful means should have affected the third party’s freedom to deal with the claimant, is a necessary element of the tort. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 5:43 pm
[Post by Venkat] State v. [read post]
28 Nov 2007, 8:28 pm
In a case captioned as Ace Constructors, Inc. v. [read post]
7 Jun 2007, 4:27 am
Ace v. [read post]
10 Jan 2011, 7:11 am
In Lexicon, Inc. v. [read post]
19 Sep 2008, 9:12 am
Co. v. [read post]
24 Feb 2015, 5:05 pm
Alan Morrison (GWU) offers his take on Arizona State Legislature v. [read post]
28 Sep 2009, 9:12 am
When it's a quick peek, as was ordered in ACS State Healthcare, LLC v. [read post]
2 Jul 2021, 4:27 am
In Secretary of State for Health v Servier Laboratories Ltd, where the loss arose because there were no generic equivalents of the invalidly-patented drug, the Supreme Court held that the "dealing requirement" laid down in OBG Ltd v Allan [2008] 1 AC 1, which states that the unlawful means should have affected the third party’s freedom to deal with the claimant, is a necessary element of the tort. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 6:44 am
Plaistow Project, LLC v. [read post]
7 Sep 2009, 2:48 am
High Court (Administrative Court) AB, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Anor [2009] EWHC 2220 (Admin) (04 September 2009) High Court (Chancery Division) Mireskandari v The Law Society [2009] EWHC 2224 (Ch) (04 September 2009) High Court (Commercial Division) Kommune & Anor v DEPFA ACS Bank [2009] EWHC 2227 (Comm) (04 September 2009) High Court [...] [read post]
17 Dec 2009, 12:35 am
In AC Ward & Son Ltd v Catlin (Five) Ltd & Ors [2009] EWHC 3122 (Comm), the claimant, AC Ward & Son Limited (AC Ward) was the owner of a warehouse in Essex, which was left unoccupied at weekends. [read post]
