Search for: "In re A. V."
Results 6861 - 6880
of 62,938
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Feb 2017, 8:15 am
The Court of Appeal agreed with the judge’s analysis and held that the case of Re V [2004] EWCA Civ 54 was clear authority for the Court of Protection having jurisdiction to consider a human rights claim, noting the need for a s 7 claim to be clearly identified and pleaded. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 9:31 am
., Inc. v. [read post]
26 May 2022, 8:47 am
Del. 2007); Zhang v. [read post]
30 Mar 2011, 11:00 am
In re Jung (Fed. [read post]
22 Apr 2020, 11:42 am
Very big news today from Federal Court of Appeal:Victory on "mandatory tariff" issue for YorkLoss for York on fair dealing guidelines.Here's the formal judgment:https://www.scribd.com/document/457774992/A-259-17-20200422-J-E-O-OTT-20200422122454-PLT-pdfHere's the Reasons:https://www.scribd.com/document/457774994/A-259-17-20200422-R-E-O-OTT-20200422130400-PLT-DE2-WDS-2020-FCA-77-pdfAnalysis to follow. [read post]
15 Sep 2014, 7:34 am
All of us have times in our lives when we're in the wilderness, when we feel adrift and alienated and unsure of where we're going or where we are. [read post]
23 Sep 2009, 2:38 pm
In Grosz v. [read post]
16 Sep 2008, 3:13 pm
During the 2007-08 term the court once again delved into this area of family law by deciding Devaney v. [read post]
28 Jul 2013, 10:26 am
Purchasing PowerSony Network Data Breach Class Action Suffers Setback -- In re Sony Gaming Network Starbucks Data Breach Plaintiffs Rebuffed by Ninth Circuit -- Krottner v. [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 7:09 am
Lusby v. [read post]
15 Oct 2013, 6:55 am
(In re Doctors Hospital of Hyde Park, Inc.), 2013 WL 3779657 (Bankr. [read post]
19 Jan 2015, 7:26 am
See Norelus v. [read post]
20 Jul 2016, 3:30 pm
., Busby v. [read post]
14 Mar 2024, 1:48 pm
There's a California Supreme Court case called People v. [read post]
6 Mar 2020, 1:45 pm
(Downey Venture v. [read post]
31 Mar 2020, 8:48 am
Unfortunately, this means we’re still likely to see vexing tattoo copyright cases in the future. [read post]
12 Apr 2011, 5:23 am
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Yeganeh v Zurich Plc & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 398 (11 April 2011) Ambrosiadou v Coward [2011] EWCA Civ 409 (12 April 2011) Murphy v Wyatt [2011] EWCA Civ 408 (12 April 2011) Stanley & Anor v Rawlinson & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 405 (12 April 2011) Knight Frank LLP v Du Haney [2011] EWCA Civ 404 (12 April 2011) Revenue & Customs v Mayes [2011] EWCA Civ 407 (12 April 2011) Stanley & Anor… [read post]
14 Feb 2020, 5:20 pm
We're not doing that. [read post]
26 Aug 2008, 12:01 pm
Per U.S. v. [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 10:04 am
" Once the prerogative of theconsumer, confusion is nowa matter for the judge ...The Court then cited cases including esure Insurance Ltd v Direct Line [2008] RPC 34, Re GE Trade Mark [1973] RPC 297 and Gut Springenheide GmbH v Oberkreisdirektor des Kreises Steinfurt (Case C-210/96) from which it was clear that the ultimate issue of confusion is one for the judge, rather than witnesses, but that a judge can reach the conclusion in the absence of… [read post]
