Search for: "ZR"
Results 61 - 80
of 458
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Dec 2023, 2:21 pm
In its verdict of September 15, 2023 (case reference V ZR 77/22), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) increased the requirements to be placed on a seller in the context of due diligence. [read post]
25 Jun 2008, 4:39 pm
Here's an idea for a law journal note: compare the approach of the German court in the AIDOL case (BGH, 8 Feb 2007 (sic), Case I ZR 77/07 - AIDOL), holding that the use of a trademark in white-on-white writing (presumably to game the search engines) is a form of trademark use, with that of, say, the Eastern District of NY in this meta-tag case (emphasizing that meta-tags are not perceived by consumers). [read post]
15 Dec 2023, 2:29 pm
In its verdict of September 15, 2023 (case reference V ZR 77/22), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) increased the requirements to be placed on a seller in the context of due diligence. [read post]
15 Dec 2023, 2:26 pm
In its verdict of September 15, 2023 (case reference V ZR 77/22), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) increased the requirements to be placed on a seller in the context of due diligence. [read post]
24 Aug 2007, 1:39 pm
The German Federal Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof) has referred with decision of 21 June 2007 (IX ZR 39/06) the following questions to the European Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: “1) Do the courts of a Member State, in the territory of which insolvency proceedings have been opened concerning the debtor’s assets, have jurisdiction based on [...] [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 4:55 am
The German Federal Supreme Court has held in its judgment of 11 October 2006 (XII ZR 79/04) that the non-availability of divorce under the applicable law may violate Art. 6 Basic Law which protects marriage and the family, and therefore German public policy (Art. 6 Introductory Act to the Civil... [read post]
15 Dec 2023, 2:23 pm
In its verdict of September 15, 2023 (case reference V ZR 77/22), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) increased the requirements to be placed on a seller in the context of due diligence. [read post]
17 Mar 2024, 10:00 pm
Januar 2024, II ZR 220/22) zeigt auf, welche Voraussetzungen beim Missbrauch der Vertretungsmacht vorliegen müssen (zu diesem Thema siehe bereits meinen Beitrag hier). [read post]
15 Dec 2023, 2:29 pm
In its verdict of September 15, 2023 (case reference V ZR 77/22), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) increased the requirements to be placed on a seller in the context of due diligence. [read post]
10 Jan 2007, 11:11 pm
Also the German Federal Supreme Court has left this question explicitly open in a judgment of 7 November 2001 (VIII ZR 263/00). [read post]
15 Dec 2023, 2:22 pm
In its verdict of September 15, 2023 (case reference V ZR 77/22), the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) increased the requirements to be placed on a seller in the context of due diligence. [read post]
6 Dec 2023, 9:30 pm
November 2020, VIII ZR 252/18).Dieses zivilprozessuale Problem hat durchaus Bedeutung auch im Jurastudium.Schauen wir uns die Problematik einmal näher an.Read more » [read post]
26 May 2024, 10:00 pm
Juni 2015 - XI ZR 243/13) seine Rechtsprechung in den sogenannten Anweisungsfällen geändert. [read post]
9 Jun 2018, 6:40 am
Petitioner argued that the advertising sign was a legal nonconforming-use under the ZR, as the sign had been displayed there since before 1961, without any break exceeding two years. [read post]
31 Aug 2016, 3:04 am
Thorsten BauschHoffmann Eitle The German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) recently issued a second decision in a nullity lawsuit revolving around a windscreen for vehicles (Fahrzeugscheibe II, X ZR 41/14). [read post]
2 Jun 2009, 3:08 am
A 2009 Corvette ZR-1 in Blade Silver Metallic with the 638 horsepower LS9 engine, Brembo disc brakes and a six speed transmission. [read post]
6 Mar 2019, 1:01 am
Case date:04 April 2017 Case number: X ZR 61/15 Court: Federal Court of Justice of Germany A full summary of this case has been published on Kluwer IP Law. [read post]
26 Dec 2009, 8:56 am
Dezember 2009 (I ZR 195/07) ist Werbung für einen Preisnachlass von 19% unlauter, wenn in der Werbung nicht eindeutig darauf hingewiesen wird, dass der Rabatt nur für Ware gilt, die im Geschäft vorrätig ist. [read post]
3 Oct 2009, 10:10 am
Zivilsenat des BGH hat seine Rechtsprechung zu humorvollen Werbevergleichen präzisiert (I ZR 134/07). [read post]
24 Nov 2008, 1:23 pm
I ZR 126/06; nicht rechtskräftig) Dass in China Produkte hergestellt werden, die gegen hiesige Patent-, Marken- oder Geschmacksmuster verstoßen, ist nichts Neues. [read post]
