Search for: "Hong v. Hong"
Results 1041 - 1060
of 1,291
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
28 Feb 2011, 2:14 am
British Airways plc v Mak and others [2011] EWCA Civ 184; [2011] WLR (D) 63 “The employment tribunal had jurisdiction to entertain claims for race and age discrimination brought against a British airline by employees based in Hong Kong, who worked for the airline on flights between Hong Kong and London among other destinations, since they did work partly in Great Britain and their employment was therefore to be regarded as being at an establishment in Great Britain. [read post]
27 Feb 2011, 9:49 pm
Entertainment, et al. v. [read post]
23 Feb 2011, 8:35 am
Patents in the Supreme Court: Bilski v. [read post]
18 Feb 2011, 6:50 am
Corp. v. [read post]
16 Feb 2011, 2:16 pm
(Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. [read post]
14 Feb 2011, 3:29 am
446/09 Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Industrial Company Ltd, Far East Sourcing Ltd, Röhlig Hong Kong Ltd and Röhlig Belgium NV and C? [read post]
11 Feb 2011, 12:10 am
Nevertheless, convenience stores in particular locations can be vulnerable to repeat victimization, especially those types of retailers that have large amounts of cash, low security, and few staff and customers likely to resist.5 Wertz' case is Brown v. [read post]
8 Feb 2011, 11:26 am
Bonuses will be paid to U.S. lawyers on March 16, 2011, and to lawyers in our London, Hong Kong and Frankfurt offices during the normally scheduled March payroll.Class I – $7,500 Class II – $10,000 Class III – $15,000 Class IV – $20,000 Class V – $25,000 Class VI – $30,000 Counsel – $35,0002011 Base CompensationThe firm will be returning to a single-scale base compensation program, effective January 1, 2011. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 3:57 am
446/09 Koninklijke Philips Electronics NV v Lucheng Meijing Industrial Company Ltd, Far East Sourcing Ltd, Röhlig Hong Kong Ltd and Röhlig Belgium NV and C? [read post]
2 Feb 2011, 3:20 pm
” Cammarata v. [read post]
1 Feb 2011, 3:00 am
The IPKat called and her lovely readers answered in the form of Michael Lin of Marks & Clerk (Hong Kong). [read post]
19 Jan 2011, 10:25 am
If we care about a bundle of freedoms rather than just economic freedom, I think NZ does better than the folks above it on the Heritage list: Australia (widespread internet censorship, thuggish police), Singapore (heavy restrictions on personal liberties), and Hong Kong (much better than Singapore?). [read post]
16 Jan 2011, 4:15 pm
In the case of Blackeney-Williams and others v Cathay Pacific ([2010] HKCA 397) the Hong Kong Court of Appeal considered a claim by a number of pilots who had been sacked by Cathay Pacific which, included, inter alia, a claim for defamation. [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 3:00 am
Beckerman, 126 AD2d 591 (2d Dept 1987), and Muller v. [read post]
26 Dec 2010, 9:39 pm
: General Motors LLC v. [read post]
23 Dec 2010, 5:49 am
" Polytree (Hong Kong) Co., Ltd., et. al. v. [read post]
13 Dec 2010, 4:30 am
See Maestas v. [read post]
11 Dec 2010, 12:39 pm
Li Kwok Keung Asser v. [read post]
6 Dec 2010, 2:36 am
Medinol Limited (EPLAW) EWHC (Pat): Costs order knocks spots off pimple patent: Select Healthcare v Cromptons (PatLit) EWPCC: ‘User’ basis available for assessment of trade mark damages: National Guild of Removers & Storers Ltd v Silveria (t/a C S Movers) (IP finance) Do it by the book: case management and questions for reference: Westwood v Knight; SAS Institute v World Programming (IPKat) EWCA finds Grimme’s agricultural machinery patent… [read post]
5 Dec 2010, 12:39 pm
For an elaborate account of the law, interested readers may refer to Chitty on Contracts (30th edition, ¶ 26-010 onwards), McGregor on Damages (18th edition, Chapter 13), and the leading decisions in Astley v Weldon, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre v New Garage (especially Lord Dunedin) and Phillips v AG of Hong Kong, (1993) 61 BLR 41. [read post]
