Search for: "Sharpe v. Sharpe" Results 541 - 560 of 4,098
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
2 Aug 2021, 12:41 pm by INFORRM
Junejo v New Vision TV Limited, heard 24 and  25 March 2021 (Murray J) Miller v College of Policing and another, heard 9 and 10 March 2021 (Sharp P,  Haddon-Cave and Simler LJJ) Wright v McCormack, heard 16 and 18 February 2021 (Julian Knowles J) Desporte v Bull, heard 9 February 2021 (Julian Knowles J) Ansari v Amini, heard 10-11 November 2020 (Julian Knowles J) Please let us know if there are other reserved… [read post]
25 Jul 2021, 4:50 pm by INFORRM
Next Week  in the Courts On 26 July 2021, Nicklin J will hear applications in the cases of BHX v GRX and BHX v Victim Support. [read post]
24 Jul 2021, 10:53 am by Florian Mueller
If major smartphone makers held out as long as automotive companies (even Volkswagen's limited Avanci license falls far short of what it actually needs), there'd be dozens of large-scale disputes (like Nokia v. [read post]
18 Jul 2021, 4:05 pm by INFORRM
Junejo v New Vision TV Limited, heard 24 and  25 March 2021 (Murray J) Miller v College of Policing and another, heard 9 and 10 March 2021 (Sharp P,  Haddon-Cave and Simler LJJ) Wright [read post]
11 Jul 2021, 4:55 pm by INFORRM
On 7 July 2021 judgment was handed down in the case of Vardy v Rooney [2021] EWHC 1888 (QB). [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 7:07 am by John Jascob
His intention to clean house at the PCAOB came into sharp focus as he removed then-Chair William Duhnke III from his position and replaced him with Acting Chair Duane Desparte. [read post]
9 Jul 2021, 12:05 am by Guangjian Tu
In Guangdong OPPO Mobile Telecommunications Corp Ltd and its Shenzhen Branch v Sharp Corporation and ScienBiziP Japan Corporation, the plaintiff OPPO made an application to the seized Chinese court for a ruling to preserve actions or inactions.[12] Before and after the application, the defendant Sharp had brought tort claims arising from SEP (standard essential patent) licensing against OPPO by commencing several parallel proceedings before German courts, a Japanese court… [read post]
The Commissioner relied on existing Patent Office authority (eg., GD Searle LLC [2008] APO 31), which followed the 2006 decision of a single judge of the Federal Court, Justice Bennett, in Pfizer Corp v Commissioner of Patents (No 2). [read post]
4 Jul 2021, 4:10 pm by INFORRM
The rulings cited the Supreme Court’s landmark civil rights-era case, New York Times v. [read post]