Search for: "State v. Ege"
Results 61 - 80
of 429
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Aug 2016, 7:35 am
Trump Ruffin Commercial, LLC v. [read post]
5 Jan 2016, 8:34 pm
EG and Mr. [read post]
10 Oct 2018, 4:23 pm
In Savva Terentyev v. [read post]
25 Feb 2014, 4:55 am
Judge Kevin Aalto identified five factors to be looked at:- the plaintiff must have a bona fide case- another party must have information pertinent to the case (eg personal details of subscribers)- a court order is the only reasonable way of obtaining this information- that fairness requires the information to be provided before thr trial- any order will not cause undue delay, inconvenience or expense to the third party or othersThere is also a comprehensive review of Canadian… [read post]
27 May 2012, 8:23 am
Thompson There are lawyers I know who would happily subscribe to this view in the current state of the legal services ‘market’; cunningly being farked up by our political masters, egged on by a herd of shield munching beserkers on the Tory backbenches. [read post]
3 Oct 2017, 11:06 am
Here are a few quick running thoughts from today's oral argument in Gill v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 4:41 pm
For a case that the Court of Justice of the European Communities has yet to hear, Case C-235/09 DHL Express France SAS v Chronopost SA (noted by the IPKat here and later here) has generated a surprising degree of interest. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 4:19 pm
Courts applying the no-confidence-in-an-iniquity/public interest defence in confidence need to weigh the public interest in preserving the confidence against the public interest in allowing the information to be shared (see eg, ABC v Telegraph Media Group Ltd [2018] EWCA Civ 2329, [22]). [read post]
7 Jul 2022, 2:05 pm
Proportionally restricting free speech rights In Murphy v IRTC Barrington J explained that, when there is a restriction on a constitutional right, the state can justify it if it meets a legitimate aim and is proportionate to that aim. [read post]
18 Jul 2008, 4:50 am
Count V: Trademark Infringement - Apple has a bunch of trademarks. [read post]
31 Jul 2023, 4:47 pm
On the other hand, the Colorado restriction might not survive the application of United States v United Foods, Inc 533 US 405 (2001), where obligations upon fresh mushroom handlers pay assessments used primarily to fund advertisements promoting mushroom sales did not survive Central Hudson scrutiny as mediated through Glickman v Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc 521 US 457 (1997). [read post]
25 May 2011, 7:04 am
See United States v. [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 12:15 am
Høeg v. [read post]
29 Sep 2023, 10:04 am
” Butler v. [read post]
2 Dec 2010, 8:55 am
” See US v. [read post]
12 Mar 2007, 10:50 pm
Any account of what is good for the poor involves a complex series of assumptions (eg. it used to be thought that easy eminent domain exercise by the state would help the poor; the contrary is probably true). [read post]
17 Nov 2014, 7:57 am
He stressed that, while looking at the content of a website might concur to a finding that this is targeted at the UK, other factors, eg the number of visits from the UK, would also have a significant - yet, not determinative - bearing. [read post]
20 Mar 2019, 10:17 am
Inc and Decision 7709/19 Reti Televisive Italiane SpA v Yahoo! [read post]
28 Jan 2024, 4:46 am
In this case, X v Secretary of State for the Home Department ([2021] EWHC 355 (Fam)), the claimant demanded the recognition by the UK authorities of her child’s adoption in Nigeria. [read post]
14 Apr 2008, 4:41 am
NYCERS v. [read post]
