Search for: "State v. C. S. S. B."
Results 7681 - 7700
of 15,316
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Dec 2023, 11:12 am
” (the Decision).c. [read post]
28 Feb 2016, 9:48 pm
This can be demonstrated by (a) establishing the Court’s resistance to recognizing the emergence of a substantive legitimate expectation in specific cases in which it is claimed (b) disclosing the broad set of grounds based on which the Court is willing to dislodge a legitimate expectation and (c) analysing the deferential standards of judicial review applied to these grounds.From amongst its earliest cases considering the doctrine, the Court has demonstrated… [read post]
26 Jun 2020, 6:19 am
Does Egilman’s opinion hold water? [read post]
28 Dec 2019, 3:22 am
[para 40]The fact that the colour red would be one of the several essential characteristics does matter, because (1) since the shape was not considered as the sole essential characteristic of the mark, it fundamentally defeated the invalidation grounds under s. 3(2)(a), (b) and (c) of the 1994 Act on the shape specific exclusions; and (2) it defined the sign at issue as not a 'colour per se' mark.[2] Is the colour ‘red’ defined with sufficient clarity… [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 5:11 am
In Scalia v. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:28 am
Also one reason for the huge expense is b/c courts have set the bar so high. [read post]
29 Jul 2018, 1:14 pm
In United States v. [read post]
26 May 2020, 10:29 am
[B.] [read post]
14 Nov 2016, 12:25 am
United States In a libel case against Maryland blogger Webster Tarpley, Melania Trump’s lawyers have said he held a ‘reckless disregard for the truth’ after posts claiming she was a ‘high end escort. [read post]
2 Nov 2006, 1:30 am
(c) If the answer to (a) is in the affirmative and irrespective of the answer to (b), is a distinction to be drawn according to whether the article whose destination is a Member State comes from a Member State, an associated State or a third country? [read post]
16 Nov 2023, 5:01 am
From Brown v. [read post]
13 Apr 2014, 4:01 pm
To be on the safe side, the Bundesgerichtshof decided to stay the proceedings and referred the following question to the Court for a preliminary ruling:‘Is Article 5(3) of Regulation … 44/2001 to be interpreted as meaning that the harmful event occurred in one Member State (Member State A) if the tort or delict which forms the subject-matter of the proceedings or from which claims are derived was committed in another Member State (Member State… [read post]
12 Jan 2011, 12:36 pm
Ed. 2d 647 (1984), and adopted in State v. [read post]
10 Mar 2010, 4:03 am
Krstin Nicevski v. [read post]
9 Sep 2008, 4:00 am
C. [read post]
12 Jul 2012, 1:45 pm
Horton, Incorporated v. [read post]
22 Mar 2007, 11:36 am
" Quoting United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2022, 10:53 pm
For instance, in an Ericsson v. [read post]
6 May 2017, 12:22 pm
S. [read post]
8 Dec 2022, 6:06 am
” (See Prosecutor v Karadzić (Decision) 16 May 1995 (ICTY Trial Chamber) paras 23-24.) [read post]
