Search for: "Shepherd v. May" Results 101 - 120 of 333
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
24 Feb 2018, 4:40 pm by INFORRM
The programme is in its fifth series and the couple’s victory may well lead to further claims. [read post]
28 Dec 2016, 6:04 am
 Lewison LJ summarised the position in Honda Motor Co Ltd v Neesam [2006] EWHC 1051 para 5 (not on bailii) as:Consent must be unequivocally demonstrated.An intention to renounce the right to a trade mark will normally be gathered from an express statement.Although consent may be inferred in some circumstances, an actual consent (not a deemed consent) be established. [read post]
8 Oct 2015, 3:00 am by Adrian Miedema
  Effectively, the employer’s approach had led to the “shepherd boy crying ‘wolf'” phenomenon: the employee may not have believed that the employer would follow through on its warnings. [read post]
9 Jun 2012, 7:29 pm
Commenting on the district court’s May 24 ruling, Institutional investor securities lawyer William Shepherd said: “The Janus case and this one demonstrate further erosion of the liability standards for investors' claims. [read post]
2 Jun 2010, 8:19 am by South Florida Lawyers
That's the issue certified by the Resplendently Resplendent Ones today in Weisenberg v. [read post]