Search for: "English v. English"
Results 4381 - 4400
of 11,196
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Oct 2016, 7:05 am
Historically, the English courts have jealously upheld rights of access to courts and often been at their most progressive in this arena. [read post]
21 Oct 2016, 12:15 am
The law has been recently considered by the Supreme Court in Sea Shepherd UK v Fish & Fish Limited [2015] UKSC 10; [2015] AC 1229, which I sought to summarise in Vertical Leisure Limited v Poleplus Limited [2015] EWHC 841 (IPEC). [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 12:36 pm
The Fourth Appellate District, Division Three, recently held in Nguyen v. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 5:31 am
Lord Brodie – Prosecutors lied to obtain warrant. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 1:56 am
The claimant alleged that the defendant was mixed up in the fraud and sought an NPO against it in the English courts to discover where the sums in question went. [read post]
19 Oct 2016, 4:00 am
Schrenk v. [read post]
18 Oct 2016, 6:37 am
Two recent English cases, Karen Millen v Karen Millen Fashions Ltd and Skyscape Cloud Services Ltd v Sky Plc, indirectly consider Declarations of Non-Infringement in relation to Trade Marks. [read post]
17 Oct 2016, 8:39 pm
Conference proceedingsBest papers will be eventually included in the printed book in English. [read post]
17 Oct 2016, 6:59 am
“Tool Without a Handle” – Mobile Tools This post continues my thoughts on qualities of digital tools that have helped make political and artistic expression more subjective, accessible and fluid. [read post]
16 Oct 2016, 2:00 pm
Franke, Opinion of Justice Katherine Franke in Obergefell v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 9:12 am
In the defense’s view, this is a serious problem: under Skipper v. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 8:16 am
It’s a mishmash of English law, utility patent, copyright, unique concepts. [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 6:05 am
Bachelder III, McCarter & English LLP, on Thursday, October 13, 2016 Tags: Accounting, Banks, Bonuses, Clawbacks, Disclosure, Dodd-Frank Act, Equity-based compensation, Executive Compensation, Financial institutions, Incentives, Management, Misconduct, Pay for performance, Risk management,Sarbanes–Oxley Act [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 3:25 am
In August 2013, a writ challenging the constitutionality of the same MCX Bye Law Rule 15.22 was filed in the Madras High Court (Mary Roseline and Stephen v Geojit Comtrade). [read post]
14 Oct 2016, 3:25 am
In August 2013, a writ challenging the constitutionality of the same MCX Bye Law Rule 15.22 was filed in the Madras High Court (Mary Roseline and Stephen v Geojit Comtrade). [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 10:06 am
| Book review: Computer Crimes and Digital Investigations | European business urge continued UK involvement in UPC on eve of Competitiveness Council meeting | Wednesday Whimsies | Book review: Global Governance of Intellectual Property in the 21st Century | Never too late 115 [week ending on Sunday 25 September] | Book Review: Arnold reviews “Economic Approaches to Intellectual Property” | The English approach to obviousness – It all depends on the facts? [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 6:50 am
Following a long line of authority including Nikken v Pioneer [2005] and Nokia v IPCom [2011], Floyd LJ held that it was necessary to distinguish between pre-trial applications to amend and post-trial deletions on the one hand, and post-trial validating amendments by re-writing the claims on the other. [read post]
13 Oct 2016, 4:14 am
This question has been indirectly considered in two recent English cases: Karen Millen v Karen Millen Fashions Ltd and Skyscape Cloud Services Ltd v Sky Plc.The background to both cases is different.Skyscape supplies cloud computer services to organisations within the UK public sector. [read post]
12 Oct 2016, 4:00 am
Bhasin v. [read post]
12 Oct 2016, 1:24 am
The case of combit Software GmbH v Commit Business Solutions Ltd dealt with combit Software, a German software development and marketing company that holds the rights to the EU trademark for the word "combit" for similar goods and services. [read post]
