Search for: "Burrow v. State"
Results 81 - 100
of 184
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
25 Aug 2021, 4:55 am
These principles (as approved and slightly amended by Blindley Heath Investments Ltd & Anor v Bass [2015] EWCA Civ 1023 (“Blindley Heath”)) were referred to in Lord Burrows’ Supreme Court judgment: It is not enough that the common assumption is merely understood by the parties in the same way. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 3:12 am
Last June, the United States Supreme Court held in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 3:12 am
Last June, the United States Supreme Court held in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. [read post]
29 Feb 2024, 3:12 am
Last June, the United States Supreme Court held in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2022, 11:00 pm
In Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. [read post]
15 Mar 2022, 11:00 pm
In Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. [read post]
1 Sep 2014, 7:04 am
Takeda had sought an application stating that Mylan was infringing its patented acid-reflux drug Dexilant [read post]
11 Aug 2011, 8:56 pm
Ramos v. [read post]
22 Aug 2016, 11:52 am
The object of my invention is to provide a means by which animals that burrow in the ground can be destroyed…. [read post]
26 Mar 2023, 7:29 am
In response to the ruling, staff attorney with the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project Meagan Burrows stated: Today’s decision will ensure that women and people seeking abortion care in Guam are not denied access to the essential health care they need because of where they live. [read post]
17 Mar 2014, 5:28 am
Downing v. [read post]
20 Oct 2021, 4:41 am
In relation to the tort gateway issue, Lord Lloyd-Jones (with whom Lord Reed, Lord Briggs, and Lord Burrows agree) gave the lead judgment. [read post]
8 Jan 2013, 9:04 am
See Town Versus Gown Fight Continues Over State University EIR. [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 1:30 am
The judge determined that "[h]uman involvement in, and ultimate creative control over, the work at issue was key to the conclusion that the new type of work fell within the bounds of copyright" (referring to the decision in Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v Sarony). [read post]
23 Aug 2023, 1:30 am
The judge determined that "[h]uman involvement in, and ultimate creative control over, the work at issue was key to the conclusion that the new type of work fell within the bounds of copyright" (referring to the decision in Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v Sarony). [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 5:04 am
Burrows, 2008 U.S. [read post]
19 Jan 2024, 9:16 am
Lord Hodge who gave the only judgment (with which Lord Lloyd-Jones, Lord Leggatt, Lord Burrows and Lady Rose agreed) stated (at [33]): “.. the purpose of section 471(3) is to circumvent the difficult issues that can arise in the application of section 471(1). [read post]
21 May 2021, 5:14 am
The appeal was heard on 8 February 2021 before Lord Reed, Lord Briggs, Lord Hamblen, Lord Leggatt and Lord Burrows. [read post]
16 Oct 2020, 1:45 am
Lord Burrows gave the sole judgment. [read post]
28 Apr 2019, 7:45 am
In Janssen v Teva (2009) the Federal Circuit stated that mere plausibility does not suffice to meet this requirement, if it did then patents could be obtained for little more than “respectable guesses”. [read post]
