Search for: "State v. Franc"
Results 861 - 880
of 2,662
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
17 Dec 2009, 7:01 am
In any event, (i) the derogations in Article 8 are expressly available to Member States which did not apply the resale right on 13 October 2001 and France, which did apply the resale right on that date, cannot benefit from them, and (ii) those derogations only allow Member States not to apply the resale right for the benefit of those entitled under the artist; they do not concern the question of application to only a restricted group of beneficiaries. [read post]
8 Jul 2022, 8:03 am
Jackson, a decision by the United States Supreme Court which overturned Roe v. [read post]
8 Oct 2012, 4:09 pm
Also, citing United States v. [read post]
11 Sep 2010, 9:50 am
In Bodum USA, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Dec 2009, 10:54 am
., v. [read post]
13 Jul 2009, 2:59 am
After a series of court battles, the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in United States v. [read post]
6 Oct 2024, 4:03 pm
The Electronic Privacy Information Center and Noyb published blogs on the ruling and the BBC, Euro News, France 24, Reuters covered the story. [read post]
28 May 2021, 10:44 am
V. (2004). [read post]
7 Apr 2015, 1:39 am
SSUK also passed on the names of two people who contacted them about volunteering, who then travelled to France and did a day’s work on the Steve Irwin. [read post]
29 Mar 2011, 2:47 am
It recalled its case-law to the effect that it was not permissible under the Convention to shield foreign heads of State and diplomatic agents from criticism purely solely on account of their function or status (Colombani and Others v France, para 68). [read post]
19 Dec 2018, 9:49 am
finding that unregistered design rights are more commonly litigated and have a much higher success rate than registered designs: There's a new IPO report on designs infringement - game-changer or stating the obvious? [read post]
8 Mar 2015, 4:09 am
However, Germany and France seem to have very IP right-holder friendly enforcement procedures. [read post]
7 Mar 2014, 10:33 am
Indeed, while under Article 52(1)(a) CTMR the application date is the seminal moment for the examination invalidity grounds, examiners and Courts are free to consider any material subsequent to the date of application insofar as it enables conclusions to be drawn with regard to the situation as it was on that date [see the CJEU’s orders in Alcon v OHIM, in Case C-192/03P, and Torresan v OHIM, in Case C-5/10]. [read post]
4 Jan 2023, 11:45 pm
However, Epic Games v. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 8:43 am
The experiences of countries like Germany and France provide possible roadmaps for how it could yield important substantive gains as well. [read post]
27 Feb 2020, 8:28 am
The experiences of countries like Germany and France provide possible roadmaps for how it could yield important substantive gains as well. [read post]
19 Feb 2015, 2:37 pm
The CJEU’s ruling in DHL v ChronopostThe CJEU made it manifestly clear in its 2011 ruling in Case C-235/09 DHL v Chronopost [see previous Katpost here] that a Europe-wide injunction should only be granted in order to ensure that the proprietor can protect his trade mark, prohibiting only uses which affect or are liable to affect the functions of the trade mark. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 5:01 am
Gatlin v. [read post]
7 May 2007, 4:21 am
Ortho-Tain, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jun 2009, 6:22 am
Lindor's legal defense in UMG v. [read post]
