Search for: "PHILLIPS v. CHAMBERS"
Results 41 - 60
of 174
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jun 2016, 9:01 pm
It was her fight that led the Court to establish in Phillips v. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 6:30 am
Phillips, Patrick J.J. [read post]
23 Dec 2015, 5:29 am
More recently, the Grand Chamber of the ECtHR in Zakharov v Russia stated that “the interception authorisation, … must clearly identify a specific person …or single set of premises”. [read post]
21 Dec 2015, 4:00 am
Oliver edited by Jim Phillips, R. [read post]
5 Oct 2015, 1:00 am
Most recently of all, in Nicklinson (Nicklinson and Lamb v the United Kingdom), the ECtH [read post]
31 Jul 2015, 10:45 am
See Kaneka Corp. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2015, 3:34 pm
Judge Sarah Vance’s opinion in Burst v. [read post]
8 May 2015, 8:15 am
PHILLIPS, INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A PHILLIPS OIL INTERESTS, LLC, EURENERGY RESOURCES CORPORATION, SYNTEK WEST, INC., CABELTEL INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, NATRON INVESTMENTS, A&B CAPITAL CORPORATION, SOUTHMARK CORPORATION, BASIC CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC v. [read post]
1 Dec 2014, 9:42 am
From Christopher Morcom QC (Hogarth Chambers) comes an interesting observation. [read post]
4 Nov 2014, 11:36 am
A day after rebel-held elections in eastern Ukraine, NATO’s top military commander, General Phillip M. [read post]
10 Oct 2014, 6:11 am
The agency also approved of a second set of regulations in the form of an interim final rule responding to the ruling in McCutcheon v. [read post]
13 Jun 2014, 6:47 am
Maryland – Hershey v. [read post]
6 May 2014, 5:57 am
Pixley v. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 7:37 pm
(Re)Emerging Issues The Seattle/Louisville Decision and the Future of Race-Conscious Programs Philip Tegeler Separate ≠ Equal: Mexican Americans Before Brown v. [read post]
11 Mar 2014, 7:19 am
The Supreme Court answered the question in the affirmative in 1985 in Phillips Petroleum Co. v. [read post]
6 Feb 2014, 4:02 am
It is not necessary, in addition, for the goods at issue to have been the subject, prior to the sale, of an offer for sale or advertising targeting consumers of that State.The Court relied on the earlier Phillips case which the IPKat looked at - not with an entirely happy face - here. [read post]
8 Oct 2013, 3:01 pm
Indeed, it bases its decision to reject Defence arguments on the ECtHR, the Al Khawaja and Tahery v. [read post]
3 Oct 2013, 7:57 am
Carter Phillips provides powerful support in an amicus brief filed for the Chamber of Commerce. [read post]
4 Apr 2013, 1:48 pm
In this case, Saffran’s unqualified assertionthat “the device used is a sheet” extends beyondilluminating “how the inventor understood the invention,”Phillips v. [read post]
25 Mar 2013, 2:41 am
The issue of exemplary damages and costs is particularly controversial, as Gill Phillips discussed in this post for Inforrm. [read post]
