Search for: "State v. Poland"
Results 81 - 100
of 610
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
11 May 2022, 2:32 pm
Background and analysis of the Judgment are provided by Comparative Patent Remedies.In the United States, there is a new development in the Epic Games v. [read post]
8 Oct 2021, 4:32 pm
Helpful Links Kinsley, et al., v. [read post]
21 Sep 2022, 6:09 am
Last week, Poland, Denmark, and Italy also filed interventions in the ICJ. [read post]
29 Jul 2011, 4:00 am
The Case of the Day is Agudas Chasidei Chabad of the United States v. [read post]
24 Jan 2025, 10:33 am
This week I taught Marbury v. [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 4:30 pm
Last week, the Republic of Finland also filed an intervention, joining Poland, Denmark, Italy, France, Romania, Sweden, the United States of America, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Germany, Lithuania and Latvia. [read post]
31 May 2011, 4:39 am
(on the application of) v Leeds City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 640 (26 May 2011) Omega SA v Omega Engineering Incorporated [2011] EWCA Civ 645 (27 May 2011) Cala Homes (South) Ltd, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Anor [2011] EWCA Civ 639 (27 May 2011) Ridgeland Properties Ltd v Bristol City Council [2011] EWCA Civ 649 (27 May 2011) High Court (Chancery Division) Group Lotus Plc & Anor… [read post]
13 Jun 2022, 12:43 pm
NSA in 2008, and our original case, Hepting v. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 5:07 pm
This requires the restriction to respond to a “pressing social need”, for relevant and sufficient reasons; and to be proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued by the State. viii) As with all Convention rights that are not absolute, the State has a margin of appreciation in how protects the right of freedom of expression and how it restricts that right. [read post]
13 Apr 2022, 12:01 am
Three years after its adoption, the discussion of and around the Directive on copyright and related rights in the Digital SingleMarket 2019/790 (‘DSM Directive’) is anything but exhausted.The fate of one its key provisions – Article 17 – is still unknown due to the pending judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (‘CJEU’) in Poland v Council and Parliament, C-401/19. [read post]
2 Dec 2022, 5:53 pm
Beham, The German-Polish Cultural Property Debate – Can Pragmatic Solutions Overcome a Convoluted Controversy Jan Barcz, The Polish-German Border in the Light of the 2+4 Treaty and the Polish-German Treaty on the Confirmation of the Border between Them Władysław Czapliński, State Boundaries and Third States – Issue of Opposability. [read post]
5 Dec 2006, 6:51 am
In Agudas Chasidei Chabad of United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2019, 2:15 pm
This includes the so-called snippet tax (the press publishers’ right) and the Article 17 rules for online sharing service providers (OSSPs).A CJEU challenge to Article 17 by the Polish government (Poland v Parliament and Council, Case C-401/19) is pending. [read post]
20 May 2008, 7:04 am
Demjanjuk) and 1:88-cv-00864-GWW (Demjanjuk v. [read post]
4 May 2022, 4:30 am
It then seeks to apply said findings to the rule of law crisis, using two recent developments as an example: the oral proceedings of Commission v Poland (Régime disciplinaire des juges) and a recent vote by the Dutch Parliament compelling its government to take Poland before the CJEU (Section 4). [read post]
7 Oct 2021, 12:59 pm
The US Supreme Court heard oral arguments in US v. [read post]
2 Nov 2023, 11:15 am
Freeman, 92 U.S. 275 (1875) [preprint]- Chapter 4: Commentary on United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2023, 5:38 am
Although ICJ decisions lack formal precedential effect, I agree with Jamshidi that the ICJ’s decision in Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. [read post]
23 Jul 2018, 7:41 am
” Although Polska uploaded and digitally formatted the episodes in Poland, the infringing performances (and relevant conduct) “occurred on the computer screens in the United States” and were thus actionable in the United States. [read post]
13 Dec 2021, 4:16 am
In essence, the General Court stated that Roshen failed to prove that the goods in question were actually sold and known under that mark during the Imperial or Soviet era in the Baltic States or Poland, this because the evidence relied upon by Roshen only related to Soviet Russia, Ukraine and Belarus. [read post]
