Search for: "Matter of English v Smith"
Results 21 - 40
of 322
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Aug 2019, 4:00 am
Smith v Obuck, 2019 ABQB 593 [351] The Plaintiff’s misrepresentations made to get on CWD cast a shadow on his credibility. [read post]
24 Mar 2021, 3:09 am
On 12 March 2021, Marcus Smith J handed down a formidable 42 page judgment on consequential matters (the “Consequentials Judgment”, a copy of which can be found here). [read post]
16 Nov 2016, 3:44 am
Thankfully, for the thousands of European Patent Attorneys carrying out panic-stricken searches through files hastily-retrieved from the archive, it appears with retrospect that Edwards v Cook represents the high-water mark of the English Courts adopting a strict formulaic approach to priority entitlement. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 1:27 am
Tarapore & Co. [(1969) 3 SCC 562)], ONGC v. [read post]
26 Jul 2017, 2:59 am
The Supreme Court of Canada has issued its decision in Google Inc v Equustek (2017 SCC 34). [read post]
3 Jun 2016, 4:40 am
Robin Callender Smith is Professor of Media Law at the Centre for Commercial Law Studies, Queen Mary, University of London. [read post]
10 Mar 2017, 6:50 am
That decision was upheld in January this year by the English Court of Appeal, which clarified that as a matter of principle, the English Courts have the power to grant such declarations in appropriate circumstances. [read post]
22 Jul 2014, 2:32 pm
Smith, 497 U.S. 227 (1990), the question was whether the rule of Caldwell v. [read post]
13 Sep 2013, 9:34 am
Novartis Grimsby Ltd. v. [read post]
20 May 2020, 4:00 am
Arconti v. [read post]
28 Oct 2017, 8:27 am
Smith Select Disc. (1660) vii. v. 325).4. [read post]
30 Mar 2021, 8:02 am
English law imposes a strict test for the implication of terms into a contract. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 2:46 am
At first instance,covered by the IPKat here, Peter Smith J (English judges usually only get a surname – unless there is another judge around with the same one, like, in this case, Sir Andrew Smith) dismissed almost all of Mattel’s claims: there was no infringement of Mattel's two SCRABBLE marks (and no passing off) by the use of SCRAMBLE or SCRAMBLE WITH FRIENDS. [read post]
5 May 2009, 4:30 am
In Flores-Figueroa v. [read post]
15 Jan 2016, 5:49 am
The role of the adviser or assessor is set out in Halliburton v Smith [2006] EWCA Civ 1599. [read post]
22 Jun 2018, 11:05 am
In Smith v. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 8:29 am
Smith v. [read post]
Case Comment: Petroleo Brasileiro S.A (Respondent) v E.N.E. Kos 1 Limited (Appellant) [2012] UKSC 17
6 Aug 2012, 2:34 am
Gaudet v Brown (1873) and Great Northern Railway Co v Swaffield (1874). [read post]
25 Feb 2015, 2:23 am
Tobias is also letting us have a copy of an English translation of Kecofa v Lancôme. [read post]
24 Jul 2010, 10:04 am
As far as we are aware, this is the first example of a purely “private” intervention in a private law case in the English courts. [read post]
