Search for: "State v. T. C."
Results 481 - 500
of 17,165
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
4 Jan 2009, 10:26 am
State v. [read post]
11 Apr 2017, 11:52 pm
T. [read post]
15 Jun 2012, 5:44 am
State v. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 11:06 am
State v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 4:00 am
Imaging, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 4:00 am
Imaging, Inc. v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 4:00 am
Imaging, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Jul 2019, 7:52 am
Peru Lorenzo Cotula & James T. [read post]
26 Nov 2013, 11:36 am
See R. v. [read post]
1 Nov 2008, 11:11 am
United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2011, 3:04 am
R (Cala Homes (South) Ltd) v Secretary of State (No.2) [2011] EWCA Civ 639 is one that we may have missed when it first came out (or we decided not to do it – we can’t quite remember now), but, given that I have some free time this morning, I thought I’d do a short note on it. [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 1:45 pm
United States v. [read post]
20 Sep 2011, 11:37 am
Dukes and AT&T v. [read post]
15 Aug 2014, 10:36 am
If so: [¶] (a) State all facts upon which you base this contention; [¶] (b) State the name, ADDRESS, and telephone number of each PERSON who has knowledge of those facts; and [¶] (c) Identify all DOCUMENTS that support your contention. [read post]
9 Jun 2014, 4:00 am
David T Morrison and Co Limited t/a Gael Home Interiors v ICL Plastics Limited & Ors, heard7-9 April. [read post]
5 Feb 2012, 6:02 am
United States v. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 12:35 pm
The Arthur C. [read post]
30 Jun 2014, 12:35 pm
The Arthur C. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 2:17 am
The answer has recently been summarised in Viceroy Cayman Limited v Anthony Otto Syrowatka [2021] ATMO 159 (Viceroy v Syrowatka), stating “[i]t is well established that ownership of a trade mark is established either by authorship and prior use, or by the combination of authorship, the filing of the application and an intention to use or authorise use”. [read post]
28 Mar 2022, 2:17 am
The answer has recently been summarised in Viceroy Cayman Limited v Anthony Otto Syrowatka [2021] ATMO 159 (Viceroy v Syrowatka), stating “[i]t is well established that ownership of a trade mark is established either by authorship and prior use, or by the combination of authorship, the filing of the application and an intention to use or authorise use”. [read post]
