Search for: "ENGLISH v. STATE"
Results 1181 - 1200
of 7,356
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
22 Jun 2022, 4:00 am
For this last week, the most-consulted three English-language decisions were: 1. [read post]
28 Oct 2007, 10:52 am
English v. [read post]
12 Aug 2013, 7:00 am
Loranzo v. [read post]
12 Sep 2022, 12:30 pm
Ct. 1614, 1618 (2022) (Barrett, J.); United States v. [read post]
18 Apr 2018, 2:25 pm
On the other hand, the CJEU in Owusu v Jackson [2005] QB 801 held that an English Court could not apply the doctrine of forum non conveniens to decline jurisdiction over a claim against a European domiciliary on the ground that the natural forum for the claims was outside Europe (albeit the CJEU in that case did not state whether this doctrine applied in cases concerned with the subject matter of Art 24). [read post]
17 Oct 2008, 4:36 pm
The case -- Alexander v. [read post]
2 Sep 2022, 8:24 am
Case Citation: Will Co., Ltd. v. [read post]
4 Feb 2016, 5:24 am
No, according to Meyer v. [read post]
11 Aug 2015, 2:10 am
The judgment (DiCaprio v Oops!) [read post]
26 Mar 2012, 3:00 am
Today we revisit the case of the day from October 28, 2011, Health Science Distributors Co. v. [read post]
21 Nov 2013, 4:22 am
for participation, by an act occurred in another Member State (Member State B), in violation of trade mark rights committed in the first Member State (Member State A )? [read post]
31 Dec 2017, 5:12 pm
Leandra English v Trump et Mulvaney Non-news in lieu of Big News: Oral arguments heard 12/22, English bid for preliminary injunction taken under advisement. - Docket with Amici Roster and List of AttorneysLeandra-English-v-Mulvaney-and-President-Trump-CFPB-Leadership-Fight 12/27/17NCSLT is an original creditor? [read post]
22 Feb 2024, 8:08 am
She then decided to bring a claim for financial relief under English law on the basis that she had purchased a property in England in 2014 and, since 2017, had been living in England permanently. [read post]
28 Jun 2018, 11:51 pm
The judgment merely states thatcat conceptually confused “it is sufficient to recall that, according to settled case-law, the repute of a trade mark is relevant, in assessing the likelihood of confusion, only as regards the repute of the earlier mark”, citing Gitana v OHIM — Teddy (GITANA), T‑569/11 (2013) (para 98). [read post]
9 Aug 2008, 4:09 pm
In United States v. [read post]
31 Jan 2017, 3:30 am
In plain English, the court in Capps v. [read post]
31 Jan 2017, 3:30 am
In plain English, the court in Capps v. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 1:00 pm
ARTICLE V Neither of the contracting Parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizens or subjects under the stipulations of this convention. [read post]
