Search for: "Royal v. State"
Results 1041 - 1060
of 2,233
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 May 2015, 6:34 am
Royal Dutch Petroleum, the article reveals how the geographical configurations of our contemporary order not only withstand transnational challenges, but are even reproduced transnationally by a multiplicity of state and non-state actors. [read post]
3 May 2015, 6:42 pm
Justice Rouleau stated in O’Donohue v. [read post]
2 May 2015, 10:24 am
., Appellants, v. [read post]
29 Apr 2015, 2:03 am
Mr Justice Arnold cited two of his cases where this had occurred: Force India Formula One Team Ltd v 1 Malaysia Racing Team Sdn Bhd [2012] [noted by the IPKat here] and Primary Group (UK) Ltd v Royal Bank of Scotland plc [2014]. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 12:07 pm
Royally. [read post]
28 Apr 2015, 3:46 am
Developer, Royal Boulevard Associates, LP (Royal) was granted a conditional use permit (CUP) to build a 352,000 square foot, five-story, multi-family apartment complex called River Edge Apartments (River Edge) in Boise, Idaho. [read post]
26 Apr 2015, 9:01 pm
In Cruzan v. [read post]
23 Apr 2015, 3:38 am
State broadcaster Television New Zealand (TVNZ) and pay-television operators Sky, Lightbox and MediaWorks, have confirmed they are preparing legal action against Call Plus and Bypass Network Services on the basis of breach of copyright. [read post]
21 Apr 2015, 8:00 am
Royal Packing Co. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 8:56 am
Appeals Court Environmental Decisions <> WildEarth Guardians v. [read post]
20 Apr 2015, 4:36 am
The witnesses stated that they were unexpectedly touched by PVDD in a sexually suggestive manner, which felt like sexual intimidation. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 12:06 pm
Co., 274 AD2d 346 [1st Dept 2000]; Yankelevitz v Royal Globe Ins. [read post]
13 Apr 2015, 7:40 am
In Mendez v. [read post]
3 Apr 2015, 11:28 am
” The Court reminded itself of the high threshold for a mandatory, rather than prohibitory injunction, of a ‘strong prima facie case’, via Francis V Kensington and Chelsea Royal London Borough Council [2003] 1 WLR 2248, then went on to the criteria for the exercise of the discretion to accommodate pending appeal in R v Camden London Borough Council ex parte Mohammed [1997] 30 HLR 315. [read post]
31 Mar 2015, 8:02 am
Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. [read post]
30 Mar 2015, 11:11 am
* Polo not the same as football, but Royal Berks give Yanks a partial whippingJeremy pens of Case T 581/13 Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club v OHIM - Lifestyle Equities (Royal County of Berkshire POLO CLUB), a decision rendered last Thursday by the General Court of the European Union in another POLO-related tradebmark dispute involving many, many horses. [read post]
29 Mar 2015, 1:54 am
The latest is Case T 581/13 Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club v OHIM - Lifestyle Equities (Royal County of Berkshire POLO CLUB), a decision rendered last Thursday by the General Court of the European Union in another POLO-related dispute, this time involving a Community trade mark (CTM) application [it seems to this Kat that the word "polo" has the same effect on brand owners as catnip has on cats -- its appeal is irresistible]. [read post]
28 Mar 2015, 5:41 pm
As Lord Browne-Wilkinson said in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex p Pierson [1998] AC 539: A power conferred by Parliament in general terms is not to be taken to authorise the doing of acts by the donee of the power which adversely affect the legal rights of the citizen or the basic principles on which the law of the United Kingdom is based unless the statute conferring the power makes it clear that such was the intention of Parliament. [read post]
27 Mar 2015, 8:29 am
Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital The Supreme Court considered there to be two distinct views within the Sidaway judgment. [read post]
26 Mar 2015, 7:47 am
Royal & Sun Alliance, Justice Price stated, “There are many good reasons unrelated to litigation that people may have to withdraw documents from their friends’ view. [read post]
