Search for: "Does 1-27"
Results 7361 - 7380
of 12,452
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
13 Apr 2014, 11:00 pm
The court clarified a number of issues relating to the scope of Art. 22 No 1, the obligations of the court second seised under Art. 27(1) as well as the relationship between Art. 22 No 1 and 27(1) Brussels I-Regulation. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 2:43 pm
., Liberty and Others v. the United Kingdom, 1 July 2008, no. 58243/00, § 62 and 63; Rotaru v. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 8:59 am
27(3)), or for the “discovery” of things that already exist, or are obvious. [read post]
12 Apr 2014, 12:00 am
1. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 12:17 pm
Logically, it seems impossible for a party to have “intent to deprive” anybody of anything for “use” in litigation that does not exist. [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 6:35 am
Perhaps the answer to this question will be covered at the next and upcoming "Presentation of UK IPO Mediation Services" in Leeds on 27 May 2014?! [read post]
10 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
Committee for Justice and Liberty et al v National Energy Board et al, [1978] 1 SCR 369 at 394 [National Energy Board]. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 10:02 pm
Safeway asked the judge for the summary judgment by advancing the argument that California law does not impose a post-sale duty to warn on grocers. [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 8:31 am
(In other words, mere affiliation confusion does not plausibly harm goodwill or reputation! [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 10:17 am
§ 201.100(c)(1). [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 9:08 am
” 27 N.C. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 8:49 am
1. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 6:15 am
But a statute, simply by its existence, does not come with a private right to enforce it in civil court. [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 5:30 am
[27] Id [read post]
8 Apr 2014, 3:00 am
Jan. 27, 2013), the defendant argued that it could not have removed the plaintiff’s complaint upon filing. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 6:02 am
As the judge notes, this is what Attachment B says: 1. [read post]
7 Apr 2014, 4:00 am
However, it does cast a long shadow over the proceedings. [read post]
3 Apr 2014, 12:30 pm
The court limited review to the following issue: Under what circumstances, if any, does the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. [read post]
Appellate Court Shuts Out Trial Court in CEQA/ESA Double Header under Deferential Standard of Review
3 Apr 2014, 11:08 am
Newhall Ranch Specific Plan (the specific plan) On May 27, 2003, the County of Los Angeles approved the Newhall Ranch “specific plan” that includes a broad range of residential, mixed-use and non-residential land uses within five villages, allowing for up to 21,308 dwelling units (including 423 second units), 629 acres of mixed-use development, 67 acres of commercial uses, 249 acres of business park land uses, 37 acres of visitor-serving uses, 1,014 acres of open space,… [read post]
2 Apr 2014, 11:08 am
Mar. 27, 2014). [read post]
