Search for: "SPENCER v. SPENCER" Results 821 - 840 of 1,276
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
16 May 2016, 1:30 am by Jani Ihalainen
Judge Katzmann distinguished both Google France SARL v Louis Vuitton Malletier SA and Interflora Inc and Anor v Marks & Spencer, determining that the wording used in the EU legislation was not an equivalent to the Australian wording, especially with the difference in 'using in the course of trade' (per Article 5 of the first Trade Mark Directive) and 'used as a trademark' under section 120 of the Australian Act. [read post]
13 Aug 2009, 8:10 pm
[edited to add link to case] In a 3-2 en banc  ruling in United States v. [read post]
29 Feb 2008, 5:44 am
That indeed appears to be the case - the SC judgment in the first Laine case (Manzoor Sayeed Khan v. [read post]
26 Apr 2007, 1:32 am
There is a bit of this involved in NTP v. [read post]
6 Feb 2022, 4:01 am by Administrator
Spencer, 2014 SCC 43, [2014] 2 S.C.R. 212, at para. 75). [read post]
30 Sep 2007, 6:29 am
The plaintiffs, Dennis Peet and Jeemell Spencer, further seek to hold the City of Detroit liable for the officers' alleged constitutional violations. [read post]
10 Jun 2014, 5:11 am
  Interflora Inc v Marks and Spencer plc [2012] [noted by the IPKat here] established that, even if most people are not deceived, passing off can still be proved. [read post]
1 Sep 2010, 10:55 am by INFORRM
  This was in the case of Spencer v United Kingdom (1998) 25 EHRR CD 105) which concerned publication in tabloid newspapers of photographs and information about Countess Spencer attending a clinic for the treatment of an eating disorder and for alcoholism. [read post]