Search for: "Fields v. Human Resources"
Results 21 - 40
of 828
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
29 Dec 2023, 3:26 am
January 18, 2024 - 2 PM: In re Korn Ferry, Serial No. 90890949 [Refusal to register KORN FERRY ARCHITECT absent a disclaimer of the word ARCHITECT, for, inter alia, "Executive search, recruitment and placement services; business consultation services in the field of human resources management and development" and for "Providing temporary use of online non-downloadable software in the field of human resources. [read post]
2 Feb 2018, 2:50 pm
Burchi, and James V. [read post]
On Delfi v Estonia… Is it time to adopt a good-Samaritan style exemption? – Sophie Stalla-Bourdillon
23 Jun 2015, 4:56 pm
The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) recently upheld the decision of the First section in the case Delfi v Estonia, which in 2013 found that holding a news portal liable for the third-party comments posted on its Internet news portal did not amount to a violation of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). [read post]
23 Sep 2021, 10:00 am
They might be brought out on state occasions, and perhaps even when international dignitaries--like the members of the UN Working Group for Business and Human Rights--appear, but otherwise are understood either as a passive resource (to be activated by other bureaucrats with mandates of far more importance to the political leadership) or as necessary window dressing to satisfy the needs of inbound corporate investors, the international financial community, or others. [read post]
10 Oct 2019, 10:19 am
María Carmelina Londoño-Lázaro & Nicolás Carrillo-Santarelli, The Control of Conventionality: Developments in the Case Law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and Its Potential Expanding Effects in International Human Rights Law Gabrielle Simm, Disaster Militarism? [read post]
28 Jun 2021, 11:13 am
The case was particularly interesting because at least in some quarters it was viewed as the opportunity to repudiate what is left of the still controversial decision of Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. [read post]
4 Aug 2016, 7:46 am
Among our newest e-resources: Note: “about” descriptions are taken from the resources themselves. [read post]
16 Apr 2014, 2:47 am
Shamir v. [read post]
4 Jun 2017, 7:51 pm
Guiding Principles for Business and Human Rights (UNGP). [read post]
29 Jun 2023, 4:00 am
On 15 May 2023 in the case of Sanchez v France, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) confirmed its earlier Chamber judgment of 2 September 2021 (see Inforrm post here). [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 2:52 am
Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company, heard 18 July 2011. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 2:52 am
Human Genome Sciences Inc v Eli Lilly and Company, heard 18 July 2011. [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 4:05 am
Rev. (2019 Forthcoming)).Jonathan Moreno, Church Attendance, Petty Crime and Rain, (March 29, 2018).Steve Sanders, Dignity and Social Meaning: Obergefell, Windsor, and Lawrence as Constitutional Dialogue, (Fordham Law Review, Forthcoming).Shawn Fields, Brief of Amici Curiae Constitutional Law Scholars in Support of Respondents in Trump V. [read post]
17 Sep 2021, 7:22 am
That divergence is irreconcilable.The text of the Chinese Human Rights Action Plan (2021-2025) follows. [read post]
31 Jan 2017, 11:43 am
Drawing inspiration from the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Obergefell v. [read post]
29 Jun 2022, 2:22 pm
(Völkerrechtsblog, Symposium, Framing Human Rights? [read post]
23 Mar 2024, 11:29 am
All Council of Europe member states have signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights, an international treaty designed to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law. [read post]
18 Jan 2018, 8:47 am
Data-Driven Regulatory Governance and Its Distorting Effects V. [read post]
25 Nov 2007, 7:20 am
The following is a Cerebral Palsy Resource Guide for the State of Michigan. [read post]
16 Jul 2021, 5:43 pm
The case was particularly interesting because at least in some quarters it was viewed as the opportunity to repudiate what is left of the still controversial decision of Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. [read post]
