Search for: "ENGLISH v. STATE"
Results 5821 - 5840
of 7,369
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Mar 2011, 11:42 am
The Court’s opinion in Wall v. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 7:16 am
In the United States, the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. [read post]
9 Mar 2011, 1:31 am
I have recently dealt in detail with the position under the English law in comparison to the stronger protections in the United States. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 12:53 pm
Heck v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 4:05 pm
Moreover, given the recent approach of the Canadian Court of Appeal in Paulsson v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 7:35 am
” (U.S. v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 4:22 am
In Rodrigues v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 12:40 am
Michael Bloch QC, for Lucasfilm, urged that the court assert subject-matter jurisdiction and enforce the US copyrights; this was advanced on three bases: 1. in light of the decision in Owusu (C-281/02) the English court is under a duty to accept such jurisdiction; 2. that such jurisdiction in respect of copyright enforcement was in any case established by the Court of Appeal in Pearce v Ove Arup [2000] Ch. 403; or 3. in the absence of compulsory jurisdiction, there remains a… [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 10:59 pm
Rosalind English will be posting on this later in the week. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 10:30 pm
The recent judgment of Mr Justice Peter Jackson in London Borough of Hillingdon v Neary gives a great discussion of some of the key issues, and I really recommend reading it. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 1:48 pm
The English kingdom is restored, but it's France that restores it. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 12:29 pm
The issues are (1) the application of copyright protection under English law to three dimensional works; and (2) whether a claim of an infringement under US copyright law is justiciable in England. [read post]
6 Mar 2011, 4:15 am
First Amendment and Confrontation Clause cases always garner a lot of attention, but over the last several years, after 2005’s United States v. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 9:17 am
In plain English? [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 7:30 am
FCC v. [read post]
4 Mar 2011, 7:30 am
FCC v. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 7:16 am
Snyder v. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 3:29 am
(s.2(2)) The test has been long-established, and was stated by Lord Diplock in Attorney General v English[1980] AC 116 at 141H-142C: If, as in the instant case, and probably in most other criminal trials upon indictment, it is the outcome of the trial or the need to discharge the jury without proceeding to a verdict that is put at risk, there can be no question that that which in the course of justice is put at risk is as serious as anything could be. [read post]
3 Mar 2011, 1:35 am
Snyder v. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 11:10 pm
Now, as we have stated earlier, in determining whether such a plea has to be accepted, the Plaint as a whole has to be read. [read post]
