Search for: "English v. English"
Results 8941 - 8960
of 9,871
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jan 2016, 11:10 pm
In its conclusion the Court cited the Abuelhawe v. [read post]
10 Feb 2024, 1:07 am
In Guerra v. [read post]
26 Apr 2023, 11:31 am
One example, the appellate decision in Rosen v. [read post]
6 Jun 2023, 1:57 pm
You can read more about the meeting in 1527 in Reformationsriksdagen i Västerås by Harald Hjärne. [read post]
14 Dec 2014, 9:52 am
Such devices are commonly called “Faraday bags,” after the English scientist Michael Faraday. [read post]
19 Nov 2010, 11:11 am
The 1968 case of Terry v. [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 4:02 am
It will no do harm in this judgment to read in Article 10 of ECHR which, of course, is now part of the English law as enacted by the Human Rights Act 1998: 1. [read post]
25 Jul 2023, 1:43 am
Or that the credibility of the technical effect is assessed at the priority or filing date (e.g., TGI Paris, October 6, 2009, RG n°07/16446, Teva v. [read post]
5 Dec 2007, 10:08 pm
There's only 1 mention, at p. 66, of Johnson v. [read post]
19 Mar 2021, 5:41 pm
Khan v. [read post]
7 Jun 2020, 4:41 am
IndiaYashwant Sinha v. [read post]
17 Oct 2011, 5:57 pm
Concepcion and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
9 Mar 2010, 12:26 am
So what do these sections actually say in plain English? [read post]
25 Dec 2012, 9:01 pm
Heller in 2008, and McDonald v. [read post]
9 Feb 2012, 12:25 pm
The jury never saw the V-Plot video. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 3:25 pm
In the context of a recent reference to the European Court of Justice from the English Court (Case C-127/04, O’Byrne v Sanofi Pasteur MDS Limited and Sanofi Pasteur SA) Advocate-General Geelhoed stated in his opinion that “if the supplier is erroneously sued as the producer, he should immediately inform the suing party as to the identity of the producer… If he were to fail to do so, by analogy with Article 3(3) of the Directive he should be treated as… [read post]
20 May 2022, 6:00 am
A few hours after the OPPO v. [read post]
12 Aug 2016, 10:30 am
Also, consider Brownmark v. [read post]
14 May 2013, 12:22 am
One approach, and the correct approach in my view, was succinctly stated by the Supreme Court of Canada in Shell Oil [1982] 2 SCR 536 summarizing a long line of English authority: A disembodied idea is not per se patentable. [read post]
26 Sep 2015, 9:16 am
Philips v. [read post]
