Search for: "Heard v. Hart" Results 21 - 40 of 156
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
3 Jul 2012, 5:56 pm by INFORRM
The case of King v Sunday Newspapers has been the subject of five judgments in the Courts in Northern Ireland. [read post]
23 Mar 2017, 4:36 am by Edith Roberts
Yesterday the court heard oral argument in two cases. [read post]
15 Nov 2020, 4:25 pm by INFORRM
Last Week in the Courts On 9 November 2020, Nicklin J heard an application in the case of Wan-Bissaka & anr v Bentley. [read post]
31 Aug 2011, 5:01 pm by INFORRM
This submission relied on the dissent of McHugh J in Bashford v Information Australia (Newsletters) Pty Ltd. [read post]
21 Apr 2009, 11:48 am
The wife heard it standing next to her friend. [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 11:27 pm
 * Book Review: Patent Enforcement Worldwide "In Honour of Dieter Stauder," Patent Enforcement Worldwide is the third edition of Hart Publishing's country reports on patent enforcement practices and litigation strategies. [read post]
16 Jan 2022, 4:22 pm by INFORRM
Goldsmith v Bissett-Powell, heard on 13 January 2022 (Julian Knowles J). [read post]
5 Mar 2012, 8:14 am by Editor Charlie
[Editor Charlie says: Please welcome another guest post by Terry Hart who blogs at Copyhype and whose Twitter handle is @terrencehart. [read post]
19 Sep 2017, 7:39 am
| Roger in troubled Waters Never Too Late 159 [week ending Sunday 6 August] Cross-undertaking in damages - Napp Pharmaceuticals v Sandoz Limited | In memoriam of June Foray: the greatest screen voice whom you probably never heard of, but likely heard | UK Supreme Court holds that grey market sales can be criminal offence | New administrative notice-and-takedown procedure in Greece | Are you XKING kidding me? [read post]
23 Oct 2023, 5:38 am by Neil Siegel
In a new essay for a symposium on abortion rights being hosted by the Journal of American Constitutional History, I argue that Dobbs v. [read post]
14 Feb 2022, 3:42 am by INFORRM
On 8 and 9 February 2022, there was a hearing in Vardy v Rooney before Mrs Justice Steyn. [read post]
13 Aug 2014, 6:06 am by INFORRM
The words “serious harm” were sufficiently clear taken in their ordinary meaning and there was no ambiguity so as to bring the rule in Pepper v Hart into play. [39] The Judge then turned to the question of how serious harm might be proved. [read post]