Search for: "HAIR v. STATE" Results 501 - 520 of 1,759
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Oct 2017, 4:22 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The board implemented those recommendations.[16] The Court agreed with the board’s stated reasons for demand refusal, namely that commencing a suit would impair Wyndham’s ability to defend against the FTC suit. [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 4:22 pm by Kevin LaCroix
The board implemented those recommendations.[16] The Court agreed with the board’s stated reasons for demand refusal, namely that commencing a suit would impair Wyndham’s ability to defend against the FTC suit. [read post]
19 Oct 2017, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
In particular, for those business with Australian subsidiaries, it should not be forgotten that “Sabre” orders [Sabre Corp Pty Ltd v Russ Kalvin’s Hair Co (1993) 46 FCR 428] could be made, where the discovering party such as the Australian entity may in certain circumstances be required to make reasonable efforts to obtain documents in the possession of the overseas entity. [read post]
6 Oct 2017, 11:55 am by Isaac
 Kenya's Competition Act 2010, section 55(a)(v), prohibits false representations that "goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, uses or benefits they do not have. [read post]
11 Sep 2017, 8:59 am by Amy Howe
The post Wedding cakes v. religious beliefs? [read post]
8 Sep 2017, 5:05 am by Jim Sedor
Haire is also threatening to file a complaint alleging Frosh’s campaign illegally charged children for ice cream at a fundraiser. [read post]