Search for: "State v. Lord"
Results 541 - 560
of 4,035
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Sep 2020, 4:03 pm
See Matal v. [read post]
27 Sep 2020, 4:37 pm
Nor did Lord Malcom, who did not consider it “necessary to dwell” on the current state of the law concerning whether such a right existed. [read post]
27 Sep 2020, 7:08 am
The case at issue was an opposition to an application of a mark combining the sign “V” with words “Valentino Rudi” by the Italian high end fashion company Valentino. [read post]
22 Sep 2020, 4:05 pm
Lord Sumption JSC explaining at [19] that, the rule originated in the division between the functions of judge and jury, the question of libel or no libel being exclusively for the jury. [read post]
21 Sep 2020, 6:43 am
Balancing competing rights Irish defamation cases are increasingly replete with comments stating the need to balance the constitutional right to freedom of expression with the constitutional right to a good name. [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 6:13 pm
In 1996, she wrote the decision in United States v. [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 2:23 pm
Hunter’s Lessee, and the United States v. the Amistad. [read post]
18 Sep 2020, 12:54 pm
The court’s decision in City Walk – Urban Mission Inc. v. [read post]
7 Sep 2020, 10:38 am
After Ford left the White House in 1977, he privately justified his pardon of Nixon by carrying in his wallet a portion of the text of Burdick v. [read post]
4 Sep 2020, 3:58 am
The (majority) Supreme Court’s decision The Supreme Court (with majority judgments from Lord Reed and Lord Hodge) closely examined the authorities on the principle of reflective loss, in particular Prudential and Johnson. [read post]
2 Sep 2020, 12:21 am
Although Lord Carnwath (in line with the dissenting opinions of Lord Sales and Lady Arden) disagreed with Lord Wilson’s view that the scope of the Guidance is limited to “purely procedural or operational matters”, he stated that this did not open the door to “the delineation of the functions of central government in relation to the fund”. [read post]
28 Aug 2020, 6:17 am
In Sim v. [read post]
25 Aug 2020, 5:25 am
Coty argued it needed a Norwich order (this type of order, also known as an equitable bill of discovery, originates from a judgment of the House of Lords in Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners, [1973] 2 All ER 943) to learn the identity of the Costco suppliers because the suppliers had breached their contractual obligations that prevented the resale of Coty products, so that Coty could institute legal proceedings against them. [read post]
25 Aug 2020, 5:25 am
Coty argued it needed a Norwich order (this type of order, also known as an equitable bill of discovery, originates from a judgment of the House of Lords in Norwich Pharmacal Co v Customs and Excise Commissioners, [1973] 2 All ER 943) to learn the identity of the Costco suppliers because the suppliers had breached their contractual obligations that prevented the resale of Coty products, so that Coty could institute legal proceedings against them. [read post]
18 Aug 2020, 5:13 am
The unanimous judgment was given by Lord Kerr (former Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland), with whom Lady Black, Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Kitchin and Lord Burnett agreed. [read post]
17 Aug 2020, 2:44 am
This is the first successful legal challenge to AFR technology and an important decision in relation to the regulation of state surveillance. [read post]
13 Aug 2020, 8:42 am
[i]Hernandez- Ortiz v. [read post]
10 Aug 2020, 12:18 pm
Legal Approach Questions of insurance coverage interpretation are decided as a matter of state – and not federal – law. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 4:19 pm
The facts of Richard v BBC [2018] EWHC 1837 (Ch) help demonstrate this. [read post]
COVID-19 Daily Insurance Regulatory Updates To Keep You Informed During The Lockdown (July 24, 2020)
24 Jul 2020, 3:13 pm
Ward, who yesterday ordered coordination of Tambellini v. [read post]
