Search for: "Line v. Line" Results 4501 - 4520 of 45,543
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Jun 2022, 2:30 am by John Jenkins
  We already have expert panels lined up to address many of these rulemaking initiatives – and you can count on our panelists to address whatever else the SEC throws our way between now and then! [read post]
23 Jun 2022, 1:59 am by Eleonora Rosati
No time to rebrand as 21 week delay to injunction refusedCombe International LLC v Dr August Wolff GmbH [2022] EWHC 125 (Ch) (January 2022)We covered the hoo-ha between VAGISIL and VAGISAN in the last volume. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 9:16 am by David Ashmore and Jonathan Lord
The outcome of Swiss Re Corporate Solutions v Sommer [2022] EAT 78, (which we reported in this month’s newsletter) provides an interesting illustration of the scope of the ‘without prejudice’ privilege rules in the context of settling an employment tribunal claim. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 6:47 am by Samuel Bray
That is a super-timely question--see Whole Women's Health v. [read post]
22 Jun 2022, 5:11 am by Michael Gordon and John L. Culhane, Jr.
” Commenting that “[u]nnecessary complexity places new entrants and small firms at a disadvantage compared to their larger competitors,” he indicated that the CFPB plans to issue guidance that sets forth “simple bright-lines. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 9:20 pm by News Desk
Supreme Court is not taking the appeal of Edwin Hardeman v. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 5:28 pm
It is  hosted by Völkerrechtsblog and brilliantly co-organized by Justine Batura (Völkerrechtsblog), Anna Sophia Tiedeke (Völkerrechtsblog) and Michael Riegner (University of Erfurt; co-founder of the Völkerrechtsblog), who will feature as guest editor of the Symposium. [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 1:40 pm by Howard Knopf
III Clause 3(2) of the bill is amended by adding the following : (2.1) Paragraph 3(1)d)(i) of the Act is amended by adding the following: (i.1) reflect and be responsive to the preferences and interests of its audiences; (i.2) to the extent possible rely on market forces to ensure that Canadians obtain the programming of their choice; IV Clause 13 of the Bill is amended  by adding  the following subsection  2.1 to section 11 of the act 2.1 For greater certainty 2.1 Conditions imposed… [read post]
21 Jun 2022, 1:34 pm by Giles Peaker
There is nothing in the approach to general damages for breach of a repairing covenant as propounded in the case law (see in particular Wallace v Manchester City Council (1998) 30 HLR 1111 and the line of subsequent authorities) to support excluding such damages from the scope of the uplift. (4) Contrary to the claimant’s assertion, the uplift supports the compensatory principle. [read post]