Search for: "Mark v. Mark"
Results 621 - 640
of 34,663
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
8 Aug 2011, 7:25 am
International Order of Job's Daughters v. [read post]
8 Aug 2011, 7:25 am
International Order of Job's Daughters v. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 11:34 am
Of course George Tenet called Greg Vogel “Greg V. [read post]
21 Oct 2011, 4:00 am
Canada’s Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) in Ron Matusalem & Matusa of Florida Inc. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2015, 2:26 am
Lord Neuberger stated that the conclusion of the Court of Appeal in Ellis v Rowbotham [1900] 1 QB 740 that the 1870 Act did not apply to rent payable in advance, is correct. [read post]
16 Feb 2015, 4:00 pm
Additional Resources: Marks v. [read post]
11 Nov 2019, 1:26 am
In Coca-Cola Co v All-Fect Distributors Ltd [1999] FCA 1721, [19], the Full Bench of the Federal Court held: Use ‘as a trade mark’ is use of the mark as a ‘badge of origin’ in the sense that it indicates a connection in the course of trade between goods and the person who applies the mark to the goods ... [read post]
25 Apr 2010, 6:34 pm
Bettner & Joseph V. [read post]
24 Jul 2023, 10:55 am
The registration of 3D trade marks in the EU is challenging. [read post]
22 Feb 2007, 2:47 am
The England and Wales Court of Appeal has confirmed an earlier European Court of Justice ruling in holding that Marks Spencer could offset losses from its overseas subsidiaries against its U.K. income (EHalsey v. [read post]
11 Apr 2013, 1:00 am
In Frolow v. [read post]
7 Dec 2023, 7:39 am
On this appeal, Jackson argued that the marks are similar because the "VÉRITÉ mark appears as the first term of [a]pplicant’s three-word mark VÉRITÉ DU TERROIR" and therefore VÉRITÉ is the dominant portion of applicant’s mark. [read post]
28 Mar 2010, 10:09 am
The first is in Joined Cases C-236/08 to C-238/08 Google France and others v. [read post]
26 Apr 2014, 3:54 am
This case emphasises the difficulty in proceeding on the basis of conceptual similarity alone and is in line with the reasoning of the Registrar in the Sun International v La Chemise Lacoste case, also incidentally involving a depiction of an animal, where it was reiterated that “trade marks do not create monopolies in relation to concepts or ideas” (cited in La Chemise Lacoste v Rong Tai Trading). [read post]
30 Mar 2010, 1:26 pm
Va. 2008), concluding that marking with expired patent numbers may constitute false marking and the use of permissive language (“may be covered”) in the marking does not create a safe harbor.December 28, 2009The Federal Circuit issues an opinion in Forest Group Inc. v. [read post]
4 Jun 2011, 9:12 am
2011 IPIL/Houston Symposium Trademark: Today and Tomorrow Mark McKenna, Dysfunctionality Very difficult to teach functionality: why? [read post]
11 Jan 2022, 5:00 am
Instructure, Inc. v. [read post]
24 Mar 2024, 5:36 am
Jane LambertCourt of Appeal (Lord Justices Lewison, Arnold and Birss) Lidl Great Britain Ltd and Another v Tesco Stores Ltd and Another (Rev1) [2024] EWCA Civ 262 (19 March 2024) In Lidl Great Britain Limited and another v Tesco Stores Ltd and another [2023] EWHC 873 (Ch) (19 April 2023), Mrs Justice Joanna Smith held that Tesco Stores Ltd and Tesco Plc ("Tesco") were liable to& [read post]
17 May 2016, 4:28 am
Gide represented Marks & Spencer. [read post]
16 Jan 2009, 2:04 am
& Shaw Industries, Inc. v. [read post]
