Search for: "P. v. Tom  " Results 21 - 40 of 489
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Mar 2023, 1:41 am by INFORRM
On 1 March 2023, judgment was handed down in Bukhari v Bukhari [2023] EWHC 427 (KB) by Steyn J. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 5:48 am by Eugene Volokh
Congratulations to Tom Kamenick (Wisconsin Transparency Project), who represented the plaintiff (and who comments here as tkamenick). [read post]
7 Nov 2022, 2:19 pm by José Guillermo
Entonces, este es un tema que quizá muchas personas no terminan de entender, pero los jefes de Estado no pueden ir expresando sus pareceres así nomás (…), por eso tienen detrás de ellos todo un aparato, como la Cancillería, que formulan la política internacional", sostuvo.COMENTARIO:Delgado Silva, le niega el derecho de opinión al Presidente de nuestra Aldea que a ningún peruano se le recorta salvo las prohibiciones… [read post]
The continued growth of the market for nonfungible tokens (NFTs) in 2022 has helped shape the zeitgeist of what has been referenced colloquially by some as the “fourth industrial revolution,”[1] defined largely by network effect (e.g., virality); rapid innovation; social, creative and civic engagement; and evolved perspectives with regard to how rights and obligations between and among parties to automated agreements are defined and enforced. [read post]
20 Oct 2022, 1:31 pm by gA
El testimonio que escuchó Borges es el de Víctor Basterra: pueden ver esa audiencia acá. [read post]
16 Aug 2022, 10:16 am by José Guillermo
He buscado en los Registros Públicos y en este enlace: https://www.gob.pe/institucion/sunarp/colecciones/2152-normas-y-resoluciones-zona-registral-n-ix el Título N° 2022-021-80442, digitado de esta manera la información que brinda la página corresponde al año 2021. [read post]
18 Jul 2022, 2:22 am by INFORRM
Tom Morrison-Bell, Google’s UK public policy manager, has warned that paying news publishers for their content to appear in search results could undermine otherwise high trust in their service. [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 2:05 pm by INFORRM
There being two legitimate aims, the next question was whether the restriction was proportionate to them; the means chosen to achieve those aim must (a) be rationally connected to the objective and not be arbitrary, unfair or based on irrational considerations, (b) impair the right as little as possible, and (c) be such that their effects on rights are proportional to the objective … (Murphy v IRTC [46] (Barrington J), following Heaney v… [read post]