Search for: "Paras v. State" Results 4841 - 4860 of 6,183
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jul 2020, 1:02 am by Merpel McKitten
At 10, the authors state that third parties which are not nominal addressees of the FRAND commitment may still "benefit from the Huawei v ZTE negotiation framework". [read post]
22 Jun 2016, 4:00 am by Ken Chasse
C.A.), the Court stated (para. 3): “In our view, exceeding the Crown’s submission without an adequate evidential foundation constituted an error in principle. [read post]
22 Oct 2013, 10:34 am by Larry Catá Backer
See also A/HRC/11/13 and A/HRC/14/27.[4] Human Rights Council resolution 17/4, para. 6 [read post]
30 Jan 2014, 9:30 am
Amongst others, lovers of all things copyright levies are probably looking forward to the decision in Case C-463/12 Copydan Båndkopi [on which see 1709 Blog post here], a reference for a preliminary ruling from apparent copyright-loving Member State Denmark, seeking clarification as to copyright levies and their calculation, including consideration of technological protection measures [on TPMs, see the recent decision in Case… [read post]
27 May 2022, 10:12 am by Eugene Volokh
Att. 3 30(v) (noting Parliament allowed civil jury trials for libel actions in the past, but "now it is usual for defamation actions to be tried by judge alone"). [read post]
26 Jan 2011, 1:43 pm
Ct., 2011-1 Trade Cases 77,311. [read post]
3 May 2011, 1:30 am by Adam Wagner
The court of appeal began by stating, quite plainly, that “torture is wrong”. [read post]
15 May 2019, 10:32 am by Hollis Kelly
He further relied on the “tort gateway” and the “necessary or proper party gateway” in CPR PD 6B para.3.1(9) and para.3.1(3). [read post]
22 Jan 2010, 1:33 pm
LeafGuard USA, Inc., CCH Business Franchise Guide 14,297. [read post]
2 May 2011, 4:49 pm
RLB Holdings, LLC, CCH Business Franchise Guide 14,586. [read post]
3 Sep 2010, 2:35 pm
International Trade Commission, 2007-1386, will appear at 2010-2 Trade Cases 77,147. [read post]
3 Feb 2010, 12:06 pm
The Borings’ assertion that Google entered onto their property without permission was sufficient to state a claim for trespass. [read post]