Search for: "Queen v State" Results 461 - 480 of 2,555
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Jul 2019, 2:03 am
Eve Gray (UCT) opened with a neo-colonial background into South Africa’s copyright reform noting the interplay of colonialism in the fair use v fair dealing debate. [read post]
8 Jul 2019, 4:48 pm by INFORRM
The Government has been ordered to disclose information that will address the long-running Regina v Regina constitutional conundrum: when can the Queen, as reigning monarch, be asked or required to give evidence in her own courts? [read post]
30 Jun 2019, 4:07 pm by INFORRM
On 26 June 2019 Dame Victoria Sharp was sworn in as the new President of the Queen’s Bench Division, replacing Sir Brian Leveson who retired on 23 June 2019. [read post]
23 Jun 2019, 4:01 am by Administrator
(Receiver of), 2017 SCC 63, [2017] 2 S.C.R. 855, invited a “flexible” application of the criteria stated in Canadian Dredge & Dock Co. v. [read post]
17 Jun 2019, 4:51 pm by INFORRM
The Court of Appeal in England & Wales has handed down its judgment in the matter of Howard Kennedy v The National Trust for Scotland [2019] EWCA Civ 648, on appeal from the decision of Sir David Eady, sitting as a judge of the High Court on the Queen’s Bench Division Media and Communications List. [read post]
4 Jun 2019, 3:51 am by Edith Roberts
Supreme Court agreed to use a case involving the wreckage of the pirate Blackbeard’s flagship[, Queen Anne’s Revenge,] to decide whether states can be sued for copyright infringement. [read post]
3 Jun 2019, 11:21 am by Lyle Denniston
  The states were required to yield to national supremacy (reinforced by Article V’s Supremacy Clause). [read post]
3 Jun 2019, 8:43 am by Tim Zubizarreta
The case, rather ironically, comes from the State of North Carolina infringing the copyright of a production company that was filming the salvage of famed pirate Blackbeard’s flagship, Queen Anne’s Revenge. [read post]
27 May 2019, 4:00 am by Administrator
This was the question in a recent case called Cassidy v. [read post]