Search for: "State v. Leisure" Results 61 - 80 of 324
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
21 Oct 2016, 12:15 am
The law has been recently considered by the Supreme Court in Sea Shepherd UK v Fish & Fish Limited [2015] UKSC 10; [2015] AC 1229, which I sought to summarise in Vertical Leisure Limited v Poleplus Limited [2015] EWHC 841 (IPEC). [read post]
16 May 2011, 1:13 pm by Blog Editorial
Parkwood Leisure Limited v Alemo-Herron and others, heard 13 – 14 April 2011. [read post]
31 May 2016, 2:14 pm by Peter Groves
But he'd probably have been perfectly happy with a dispute over the ownership of a wall, as in The Creative Foundation v Dreamland Leisure Ltd & Ors [2015] EWHC 2556 (Ch) (11 September 2015).Separating intellectual property from the concrete items in or on which it is carried or displayed is a big conceptual problem for anyone coming fresh to the topic. [read post]
18 Feb 2016, 4:00 am by Ben
”http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14278737.Glasgow_pub__quot_first_in_Scotland_quot__to_receive_penalty_for_Premier_League_copyright_breach/Joined cases C-403/08 Football Association Premier League Ltd and Others v QC Leisure and Others and C-429/08 Karen Murphy v Media Protection Services Ltd More on the Karen Murphy case here. [read post]
13 Dec 2012, 1:33 pm by Sean Patrick Donlan
The publication of this series will coincide with the fiftieth anniversary of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, sixtieth anniversary of Brown v. [read post]
12 Feb 2017, 6:54 am
"  See Vertical Leisure Ltd v Poleplus Ltd [2015] EWHC 841 (IPEC) at 66.As the Master identified, one of the difficulties that claimant(s) in IP claims commonly face is that they have no direct knowledge of the circumstances in which the infringing acts occurred and the individuals directly involved in them. [read post]
25 Mar 2016, 4:06 am
In reaching this view, this Kat does not rely on the reasoning of the CJEU decision in Case C-403/08 FAPL v QC Leisure [2011]. [read post]
9 May 2011, 2:03 am by Blog Editorial
Parkwood Leisure Limited v Alemo-Herron and others, heard 13 – 14 April 2011. [read post]
15 Jun 2015, 4:20 am by Charlotte Bamford, Olswang LLP
The reasoning for this was stated to be that, as the budget decision had been made and carried out, and as it would be extremely difficult to reverse – in particular as it would have a retrospective effect on council tax – no relief could be granted and thus the appeal must be dismissed. [read post]
30 Nov 2015, 3:34 am
 As Annsley explains in this post, that litigation started back in 2012 and focuses on an exciting Rovi's patent - European Patent (UK) No 0, 862,833 - which relates to interactive video communications and viewer-controlled selection of programming information.* Jeremy Phillips' words of warning- and some further thoughtsStarting from Jeremy's words at the 10th anniversary JIPLP program, Neil reflects on the state of IP in the universities. [read post]
10 Nov 2011, 8:17 am by Keating Law Offices
The Illinois Supreme Court analyzed this legal quandry in the case of Boub v. [read post]
8 Nov 2011, 12:29 pm by Keating Law Offices
The Illinois Supreme Court analyzed this legal quandry in the case of Boub v. [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 12:01 pm
  And, if you are defending off-label promotion claims, we recommend a less leisurely stroll – there is a lot of good stuff in these cases. [read post]
22 May 2011, 12:00 pm by Blog Editorial
Parkwood Leisure Limited v Alemo-Herron and others, heard 13 – 14 April 2011. [read post]