Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B." Results 7381 - 7400 of 15,316
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Jan 2011, 2:46 am by John L. Welch
As to blurring, the Board looked to the non-exclusive factors set out in Section 43(c)(2)(B). [read post]
24 Jul 2022, 4:00 am by Administrator
S. 278.93 is constitutional under ss. 7 and 11(d); the accused is not compelled to testify and, therefore, s. 11(c) is not engaged; there is no absolute rule against defence disclosure. [read post]
14 Nov 2018, 3:25 am
The sufficiency requirement is designed to ensure a patentee satisfies their side of the bargain with the state by providing a full public disclosure of their invention in exchange for the granted patent.Legal basis for sufficiency in the UK can be found in Section 72(1)(c) of the UK Patents Act 1977 (UKPA). [read post]
11 Aug 2022, 9:14 pm by Ben Allen
 § 851, however, continues, as shown in the Sixth Circuit's opinion in United States v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 4:22 pm by NBlack
Gokhan Orun d/b/a/ WhoNear) and a New York family court judge (Noel B. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2019, 4:22 pm by NBlack
Gokhan Orun d/b/a/ WhoNear) and a New York family court judge (Noel B. v. [read post]
13 Jan 2011, 10:00 pm by Rosalind English
But natural justice is not all-encompassing; where Parliament has conferred power on the executive, it is not generally for the courts to superimpose additional procedural safeguards (BAPIO v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] EWCA Civ 1139 ) (Kay LJ’s own formulation). [read post]