Search for: "English v. English"
Results 5561 - 5580
of 11,201
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2023, 6:46 am
This post will cover the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Smith v. [read post]
5 Jan 2017, 4:11 am
., Ltd and Others v AbbVie Biotechnology Limited [2016] EWHC 3383 (Ch). [read post]
16 Dec 2020, 6:21 pm
They include case management system of the English courts (procedural efficiency), expertise in English law and complex commercial transactions, the quality of the English bar, availability of varieties of interim measures, prioritisation of private justice, independence of the judiciary, pro-enforcement of contracts and judgments amongst others. [read post]
9 Dec 2013, 10:17 pm
See Markman v. [read post]
17 Oct 2013, 5:00 am
Those arguments are more relevant, and far more prevalent, in non-drug/device cases where the presentation of warnings is not minutely governed by federal law, and unlike prescribing physicians, there are plaintiffs who can’t read English, who have to deal with warnings in workplace settings, or who are just plain knuckleheads in using products. [read post]
23 Dec 2013, 6:17 am
Martinez v. [read post]
31 Oct 2017, 12:05 am
Limited and others v Yeda Research and Development Company Limited and others [2017] EWHC 2629 (Pat) - the first application of Actavis v Eli Lilly in the Patents Court. [read post]
22 Jul 2017, 2:53 pm
Comm. v. [read post]
4 Jun 2018, 3:02 am
Telenor's decision follows the landmark ruling of the Swedish Patent and Market Court of Appeal last year ordering Swedish ISP, Bredbandsbolaget (B2) to block access to The Pirate Bay and Swefilmer: Swedish ISP Telenor will voluntary block The Pirate Bay.Kat Neil Wilkof wonders whether, in an age where image is (nearly) everything, the name of the street can have an economic and reputational effect on the parties involved, following the recent relocation of a notable local law firm to a… [read post]
9 Dec 2016, 1:00 pm
| The U.S. presidential election of 1876: votes, cannabis and intellectual property| CJEU upholds duty to reverse-engineer trade marks in Rubik's cube decision, but what about the actual v abstract test? [read post]
9 Apr 2018, 1:57 am
Questions in the Tom Kabinet CJEU reference finalized (at last) and brought to us by Kat Eleonora.PatentsThe AmeriKat reports that the Court of Appeal, following EPO, reverses Carr J in Regeneron v Kymab dispute and also providing a summary of English law in sufficiency. [read post]
4 Aug 2024, 4:03 am
Stakeholders, and lovers of the interaction of competition v contract law in the SEP space, will be fastidiously watching this case for the Munich court's response, as well as how the Unified Patent Court will be applying Huawei v ZTE in future cases. [read post]
1 Nov 2016, 10:23 am
The judge had said that the length of occupation of a property could not be a factor in the decision (basing herself on Etherton LJ in Thurrock Borough Council v West [2012] EWCA Civ 1435 – our post). [read post]
10 Jul 2014, 7:17 am
by Dennis Crouch Sabatino Bianco, M.D. v. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 5:35 am
Scroggin v. [read post]
22 May 2014, 9:10 am
The report noted that there are 38 Atlas V missions on the manifest (presumably including the NROL-33 that launched this morning) but only 16 RD-180 engines stockpiled in the US. [read post]
10 May 2016, 7:56 am
General principles The general principle of English law is that the parties have freedom to agree whatever terms they choose to undertake and can do so in a document, by word of mouth, or by conduct. [read post]
12 Feb 2008, 3:19 pm
Majorstake Limited (Respondents) v Curtis (Appellant) [2008] UKHL 10. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 1:00 pm
Encorp and Vague v. [read post]
30 Jun 2008, 8:33 pm
Willie Eaton v. [read post]
