Search for: "State v. C. R."
Results 6041 - 6060
of 13,583
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Dec 2016, 8:06 am
Relying on SeaPak v. [read post]
18 Oct 2018, 2:29 pm
Supp. 2d 109, 115 (D.D.C. 2004) (citing United States v. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
23 Jan 2013, 1:02 am
State Farm Mut. [read post]
14 Jan 2009, 12:07 pm
By Glen Hansen In Arcadia Development Co. v. [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 12:10 pm
This was well-summarised by the Court in the following terms: (i) a claim for possession of land is the modern equivalent of a claim for ejectment (see the discussion in Secretary of State for the Environment v Meier [2009] UKSC 11; [2009] 1 WLR 2780, paragraphs 6-7, 26-33, and 59-61); (ii) a claim for ejectment (as opposed to a claim for an injunction in trespass) could only be maintained by someone who could establish a legal estate in the land (see e.g. per Lord Mansfield CJ,… [read post]
25 Jul 2010, 12:10 pm
This was well-summarised by the Court in the following terms: (i) a claim for possession of land is the modern equivalent of a claim for ejectment (see the discussion in Secretary of State for the Environment v Meier [2009] UKSC 11; [2009] 1 WLR 2780, paragraphs 6-7, 26-33, and 59-61); (ii) a claim for ejectment (as opposed to a claim for an injunction in trespass) could only be maintained by someone who could establish a legal estate in the land (see e.g. per Lord Mansfield CJ,… [read post]
1 Mar 2010, 8:19 am
Co. v. [read post]
13 Jul 2021, 4:05 pm
The Order directs the Secretary of Commerce to reconsider proposed regulations concerning technology transfer: (r) The Secretary of Commerce shall: (i) acting through the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), consider initiating a rulemaking to require agencies to report to NIST, on an annual basis, their contractors’ utilization activities, as reported to the… [read post]
9 Oct 2016, 7:26 am
§ 1125(c)(2)(A). [read post]
30 Jul 2022, 7:22 am
The Commission Implementing Regulation No 1329/2014 (point 9 of Annex IV to Form V) does not have a bearing on this decision as it can only implement but not modify the Regulation (para. 73). [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 6:43 pm
State v. [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 10:57 pm
& C. [read post]
2 Jul 2020, 4:30 am
CJ Roberts rejects the A&C analysis of the 2nd, 9th, and D.C. [read post]
10 Sep 2017, 3:07 pm
R. [read post]
14 Jan 2015, 10:04 am
The British Columbia Court of Appeal has determined that human sperm is “property” under the terms of a provincial statute that regulates the storage of goods.The court ruled against the University of British Columbia and found it cannot rely on an exclusion clause it included in an agreement with a number of sperm donors.The decision in Lam v. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 4:16 pm
It is remarkable that in this respect he refers to the ruling of the EU Court of Justice (ECJ) in Case C? [read post]
21 Nov 2013, 2:32 pm
In an opinion by Justice Robert R. [read post]
3 Mar 2020, 4:51 am
Dunjun v. [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 5:34 am
Cushman decided to concentrate resources on C-wing. [read post]
