Search for: "Hoffmann v. Hoffmann" Results 101 - 120 of 463
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Nov 2016, 3:36 pm
In these circumstances and absent an error of principle, an appellate court will be very cautious in differing from the judge's evaluation: see SmithKline Beecham's Patent [2006] RPC 323 at [38] per Lord Hoffmann; Halliburton Energy Services Inc v Smith International (North Sea) Ltd and anor [2006] EWCA Civ 1715 at [24] to [25] per Jacob LJ" 3. [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 4:31 pm by INFORRM
  Lord Toulson noted the frequently quoted words of Lord Hoffmann in R v Secretary of State for the Home Office, Ex p Simms ([2000] 2 AC 115) that “Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words” and said importantly that “while Lord Hoffmann said that this presumption will apply “even” to the most general words, but I would say further that the more general the words, the harder it is likely to be to… [read post]
20 Oct 2016, 6:09 am by Dan Tench
  Lord Toulson noted the frequently quoted words of Lord Hoffmann in R v Secretary of State for the Home Office, Ex p Simms [2000] 2 AC 115 that “Fundamental rights cannot be overridden by general or ambiguous words” and said importantly that “while Lord Hoffmann said that this presumption will apply “even” to the most general words, but I would say further that the more general the words, the harder it is likely to be to rebut the… [read post]
15 Sep 2016, 8:00 am by Dan Ernst
Walloch The Antivaccine Heresy: Jacobson v. [read post]
1 Aug 2016, 8:00 am by Dan Ernst
Walloch, The Antivaccine Heresy: Jacobson v. [read post]
8 May 2016, 8:12 am by Howard Friedman
LEXIS 59514 (ED CA,May 3, 2016), a California federal magistrate judge allowed an inmate to proceed with his complaint that a change in regulations reduced the kinds of religious and cultural items that Native American inmates can possess.In Hoffmann v. [read post]
28 Apr 2016, 11:29 am by David Fraser
 I agree with Lord Hoffmann that the new defence is “available to anyone who publishes material of public interest in any medium”: Jameel, at para. 54. [read post]
16 Apr 2016, 11:40 am by INFORRM
  This point was clearly recognised in Campbell v MGN Ltd: as Lord Hoffmann said, it is about ‘the right to control dissemination of information about one’s private life and the right to the esteem and respect of other people’. [read post]
22 Mar 2016, 6:12 am
Hoffmann-La Roche AG and Genentech Inc. | Design v Copyright in Italy | Unitary patent and double patenting | Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd & Anor | IKEA in Indonesia | Eli Lilly v Janssen Sciences. [read post]
14 Mar 2016, 3:23 am
Hoffmann-La Roche AG and Genentech Inc. | Design v Copyright in Italy | Unitary patent and double patenting | Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd & Anor | IKEA in Indonesia | Eli Lilly v Janssen Sciences. [read post]
7 Mar 2016, 1:55 am
Hoffmann-La Roche AG and Genentech Inc. | Design v Copyright in Italy | Unitary patent and double patenting | Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd & Anor | IKEA in Indonesia | Eli Lilly v Janssen Sciences.Never too late 83 [week ending on Sunday 14 February] – Indigenous IP | Arnold J's latest judgment flags down the iconic London black cab | Life of a national/EU trade mark ... in a map | A comprehensive… [read post]
29 Feb 2016, 11:27 pm
Hoffmann-La Roche AG and Genentech Inc. | Design v Copyright in Italy | Unitary patent and double patenting | Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc v Kymab Ltd & Anor | IKEA in Indonesia | Eli Lilly v Janssen Sciences.Never too late 83 [week ending on Sunday 14 February] – Indigenous IP | Arnold J's latest judgment flags down the iconic London black cab | Life of a national/EU trade mark ... in a map | A comprehensive… [read post]