Search for: "Word v. Lord"
Results 401 - 420
of 2,056
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Apr 2019, 8:41 am
Last Monday, having spent the best part of a day reading the UK government's Online Harms White Paper, I concluded that if the road to hell was paved with good intentions, this was a motorway.Nearly two weeks on, after full and further consideration, I have found nothing to alter that view. [read post]
18 Apr 2019, 2:22 am
The Supreme Court Lady Hale, Lord Wilson, Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones and Lady Arden dismissed the appeal on both points. [read post]
17 Apr 2019, 2:56 am
In Actavis v Lilly, Lord Neuberger was keen to follow Germany, which was subsequently watered down in Warner Lambert and, now, more so. [read post]
15 Apr 2019, 11:44 pm
Retromark Volume V: the last six months in trade marks1. [read post]
10 Apr 2019, 4:52 pm
The appeal was considered by Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin. [read post]
8 Apr 2019, 7:22 am
Citing the House of Lords decision, Chartbrook Ltd v Persimmon Homes Ltd (2009), the Court recognised that to adopt a corrective construction: “it should be clear that something has gone wrong with the language and it should be clear what a reasonable person would have understood the parties to have meant”. [read post]
4 Apr 2019, 7:19 pm
On 3 April 2019 the Supreme Court gave its judgment in Stocker v Stocker [2019] UKSC 17. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 6:50 am
In Barrick Gold Corp. v. [read post]
1 Apr 2019, 1:00 am
The proposed panel for hand down is Lord Reed, Lord Kerr and Lord Sales. [read post]
27 Mar 2019, 10:22 am
In other words, it would not have been obvious to a skilled person to initially try a dose as low as 5 mg in a hypothetical Phase IIb clinical trial. [read post]
26 Mar 2019, 8:09 am
He was prepared to disregard (or, at least, not accept) the strongly worded recommendation of Sir Jeremy Heywood. [read post]
19 Mar 2019, 3:15 am
Lord Wilson disagreed with two aspects of Sales LJ’s judgment, namely his very narrow construction of the word “trauma” in the protocol and his handling of Dr Zapata-Bravo’s oral evidence. [read post]
7 Feb 2019, 4:47 pm
In other words, the focus of the analysis is usually the question of proportionality. [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 2:03 pm
In other words, whereas most other forms of cybercrime involve some type of theft such as exfiltrating credit card data or intellectual property that can be sold on the dark web, ransomware is different. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 4:15 pm
He said out of the blue “Thank the good Lord for Mapp v. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 1:31 am
Today, 24 January 2019, five Supreme Court judges (Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin) will hear Stocker v Stocker UKSC 2018/0045, an appeal against the 12 February 2018 Court of Appeal decision of Lady Justice Sharp, with whom Lord Justice McFarlane and Sir John Laws concurred ([2018] EWCA Civ 170). [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 12:08 am
Today, 24 January 2019, five Supreme Court judges (Lord Reed, Lord Kerr, Lady Black, Lord Briggs and Lord Kitchin) will hear Stocker v Stocker UKSC 2018/0045, an appeal against the 12 February 2018 Court of Appeal decision of Lady Justice Sharp, with whom Lord Justice McFarlane and Sir John Laws concurred ([2018] EWCA Civ 170). [read post]
15 Jan 2019, 3:15 am
Ever since Lord Diplcok's speech in Catnic v Hill & Smith [1981] FSR 60, [1982] RPC 183 (HL) we have been familiar with the idea of a purposive approach to interpreting patent claims - considering what the applicant had in mind, the spirit of the claims, rather than the precise words used. [read post]
13 Jan 2019, 11:56 am
This is supported by Bole v Huntsbuild making reference to Summers v Salford Corporation, which was a tenancy case under the precursor to section 8 LTA 1985 (on the same wording as s.8) in interpreting the meaning of s.1 DPA. [read post]
9 Jan 2019, 3:29 am
IPKat's summary of the Supreme Court decision (Warner-Lambert v Actavis [2018] UKSC 56) can be found here. [read post]
