Search for: "SHAW v. BELL"
Results 21 - 40
of 41
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Jan 2013, 1:18 pm
This was precisely the case in the BMG v. [read post]
3 Jan 2013, 2:15 pm
That’s what Shaw and Telus did vigorously and successfully did in 2004, with Bell and Rogers onside if not quite as actively. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 1:01 pm
The Respondents on the SCC appeal included some of Canada’s largest telecommunication companies – Bell Canada, Rogers Communications Inc., Rogers Wireless Partnership, Shaw Cablesystems G.P. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 11:59 am
”The Copyright Board had approved taxes for downloading but they were appealed by large Canadian telecommunications companies like Rogers Communications, Bell Canada, Telus Communications, and Shaw Cablesystems.In Entertainment Software Association v. [read post]
30 Nov 2011, 4:00 am
” Viacom v. [read post]
4 Oct 2011, 9:09 am
• Shaw Cablesystems v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 2:16 pm
(Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Dec 2010, 11:13 pm
V is for vertical integration, which emerged as the key concern after Bell and Shaw bought up two leading Canadian broadcasters. [read post]
7 Jul 2010, 11:07 am
Bell and MelissaRobbins Contts for Real Party in Interest Quality Loan Service Corporation.Bryan Cave, Douglas E. [read post]
4 Jul 2010, 2:03 pm
Writing in the “Independent” Matthew Bell discusses the settlement of the claim. suggesting that the action leaves lots of costs and no winners. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:39 am
FIO Act 2000, ss 35 (ministerial communications), 40 (personal data), 42 (legal professional privilege) Roger Alwyn Bell v IC EA/2009/0110. [read post]
9 Sep 2009, 11:18 pm
Ian Boyko, Canadian Federation of Students Expand fair dealing in line with the case of CHH v. [read post]
15 Jul 2009, 7:40 am
The hearing surprisingly included a near-rehearing of the Bell v. [read post]
2 Oct 2008, 4:27 am
Rost v. [read post]
10 Apr 2008, 4:44 am
Nash in New York County adopts the Second Department's holding: "Public policy dictates that courts pay particular attention to fee arrangements between attorneys and their clients, as it is important that a fee contract be fair, reasonable, and fully known and understood by the client (see Jacobson v Sassower, 66 NY2d 991, 993, 499 NYS2d 381, 489 NE2d 1283 [1985]; Shaw v Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co., 68 NY2d 172, 176, 507 NYS2d 610, 499 NE2d 864 [1986];… [read post]
31 Jan 2008, 4:00 am
Nash in New York County adopts the Second Department's holding:"Public policy dictates that courts pay particular attention to fee arrangements between attorneys and their clients, as it is important that a fee contract be fair, reasonable, and fully known and understood by the client (see Jacobson v Sassower, 66 NY2d 991, 993, 499 NYS2d 381, 489 NE2d 1283 [1985]; Shaw v Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co., 68 NY2d 172, 176, 507 NYS2d 610, 499 NE2d 864… [read post]
18 Sep 2007, 4:34 am
The lien is imposed on the client's cause of action, in whatever form it may take during the course of litigation, and follows the proceeds, wherever they may be found (see Matter of Cohen v Grainger, Tesoriero & Bell, 81 NY2d 655, 658 [1993]). [read post]
23 Jun 2007, 2:22 pm
" Jensen v. [read post]
22 May 2007, 1:00 am
In Bell Atlantic v. [read post]
22 May 2007, 1:00 am
In Bell Atlantic v. [read post]
