Search for: "English v. English"
Results 7581 - 7600
of 11,204
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
3 Jan 2024, 12:08 am
This is reminiscent of a similar omission in the restatement by the UK Supreme Court in Rubin v Eurofinance SA [2013] 1 AC 236, [2012] UKSC 46, which has since been taken as authoritative for the proposition that residence is not a basis of international jurisdiction under English common law. [read post]
21 Apr 2022, 3:50 pm
See, e.g., Discriminatory, Oxford English Dictionary (online ed.) [read post]
15 Jun 2021, 1:12 pm
The court distinguished United States v. [read post]
29 Jan 2021, 7:20 am
If that turns out to the case then Illumina Cambridge Limited v Latvia MGI Tech SIA and others is a substantial judgment to mark this departure. [read post]
13 Dec 2013, 5:01 am
An opposition was filed by Manchester United Football Club which, in its way, was the Tesco of English football clubs, there being many oth [read post]
17 Feb 2023, 6:31 am
In Impression Products v. [read post]
23 Jul 2015, 9:11 am
Jurisdictional Boundaries of Prior Use within Britain: An analysis of the House of Lords’ judgments in Roebuck v Stirling (1774) and Brown v Annandale (1842)Barbara Henry (University of Hertfordshire)Commentator | Eva Hemmungs Wirtén (Linköping University, Sweden) Two cases, 60 years apart. [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 6:19 pm
In its broadest the test is as set out in Ball v. [read post]
11 Jun 2015, 4:46 am
Brown v. [read post]
31 Oct 2015, 6:48 am
He suggested that Clapper v. [read post]
10 May 2019, 6:05 am
In Sky v Skykick the defendant argued this removal restricted its freedom to conduct business. [read post]
15 Dec 2015, 8:34 am
Harutyun didn't read or write English. [read post]
16 May 2014, 6:28 am
In Bullard v. [read post]
1 Feb 2012, 8:50 pm
[It] discusses TechSearch, L.L.C. v. [read post]
28 Jun 2014, 4:49 am
No…On the question of the implied term, HHJ Hacon found Lord Hoffmann’s comments in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd [2009] UKPC 10(a judgment of the Board of the Privy Council) instructive. [read post]
31 Jan 2023, 10:19 am
Although Merpel wonders why the offers were not also made under Part 36, the Judge nevertheless decided that the refusal of the offers by ONI was not "highly unreasonable" (as is the test under see White Book CPR 44.3.12, F & C Alternative Investments (Holdings) v Barthelemy [2012] EWCA Civ 843 at [70] (citing Kiam v MGM), Astex Therapeutics v AstraZeneca [2018] EWCA Civ 2444 at [61]-[78]). [read post]
3 Jul 2017, 8:46 am
The ProfProf Wim Alberts contacted our resident rhino to post this piece in which he traverses the African savannah, English countryside and Swedish fjords to establish the true meaning of trade mark infringement, in a beemer. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 1:52 pm
The Henderson v Henderson rule did not apply for two reasons. [read post]
10 Dec 2014, 3:55 am
Those pesky TurtlesIt seems SiriusXM has decided to rely on the 1940 case of RCA v Whiteman et al to persuade U.S. [read post]
6 Jul 2013, 5:04 pm
In the United Kingdom this was memorialized in the Magna Carta—and then deepened during the course of the English civil war of the 17th century (through Coke, an important figure in colonial political jurisprudence) and naturalized among the English colonial population. [read post]
