Search for: "Will v. Hughes" Results 841 - 860 of 2,709
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
12 Feb 2018, 3:40 am by IAN SKELT
They might find some consolation in Lord Hughes (from [102] onwards), who did not think that the distinction between positive acts and omissions was the sole explanation for the previous decisions protective of the police. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 4:33 am by CMS
Google reviewed the relevant case law on CPR 19.6(1), arguing that the authorities (in particular, Emerald Supplies Ltd v British Airways plc [2011] Ch 345 and Rendlesham Estates plc. v Barr Ltd [2015] 1 WLR 3663) supported its position. [read post]
20 Sep 2020, 10:32 am by Magdaleen Jooste
Rose Hughes provided some further helpful information for candidates here. [read post]
28 Jun 2023, 1:06 pm by Benjamin Goh
Henry Yang followed up on his previous reporting on the Interdigital v Lenovo FRAND judgment of the High Court of England and Wales, and analysed in detail the first part (of three) of the judgement regarding comparable licenses and determination of a FRAND rate. [read post]
15 Aug 2014, 12:47 pm by Aaron Jue and Bill Budington
Speech) The plaintext reminds us of an important ruling made in the historic case Bernstein v. [read post]
20 Jan 2024, 10:47 am by Jocelyn Bosse
The court was not convinced that consumers would recognise the prefix 'MY' as referring to 'mycelium' and 'myco', a prefix meaning 'fungi'.Anastasiia Kyrylenko commented on the decision of AFNIC (the French country-code top-level domain name registrar) to transfer 'porcelainefrancaisedelimoges.fr' to the owners of the French geographical indication (GI) ‘Porcelaine de Limoges’, even though the domain name was registered before the… [read post]
26 Mar 2024, 5:13 am by Jocelyn Bosse
It was irrelevant that the contested trade mark may have been developed based on the word ‘hyundai’ because the public would still have to engage in a highly imaginative cognitive process in order to decipher the sign.PatentsRose Hughes reported on the first substantive decision of the UPC Court of Appeal, which reversed the preliminary injunction in 10x Genomics v NanoString. [read post]