Search for: "Miller v. Phillips"
Results 121 - 140
of 182
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Feb 2018, 11:00 am
The military commission in United States v. [read post]
15 Jan 2012, 4:06 pm
On the Centre for Law, Justice and Journalism blog, Alex Antoniou analyses the recent decision in R v Peacock. [read post]
13 Mar 2023, 2:13 am
On 10 March 2023 there was a contempt application in the case of Miller -v- Peake QB-2022-001106. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 3:50 am
Other cases included: Mr Peter Light v Hounslow Chronicle, Clause 1, 15/06/2012; RMT Union v Evening Standard, Clause 1, 15/06/2012; A man v The Scottish Sun, Clauses 1, 3, 15/06/2012; A man v Irish News, Clause 3, 15/06/2012; Mr Martin Robbins v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 15/06/2012; Mr Colin Cortbus v Daily Mail, Clause 1, 15/06/2012; Mrs Caroline Panesar v The Mail on Sunday, Clause 4, 15/06/2012; Mrs Caroline Panesar v Daily… [read post]
10 Sep 2017, 3:07 pm
Julien v. [read post]
31 Oct 2011, 1:30 am
Other guests include the judge Peter Rook, Desmond Browne QC and Gill Phillips, the Guardian’s director of editorial legal services. [read post]
6 Feb 2015, 8:57 am
Phillips v. [read post]
6 Jul 2012, 8:55 am
State v. [read post]
15 Feb 2012, 4:00 am
Webb v. [read post]
27 Aug 2009, 7:00 am
Phillips - Operator of Smoking Arrow TDM, Inc. - Mastic, NY Thomasina Mack - Owner/Operator of TDM Law Department attorneys Eric Proshansky, Gail Rubin and William Miller are leading the litigation. [read post]
14 Jan 2018, 11:32 pm
This contribution suggests that scents may be more easily registered in the near future as a consequence of the EU reform of trade marks and of some technological innovations.Scents are signs because they can convey information (Phillips Electronics NV v Remington Consumer Products Ltd (No. 1) [1998] RPC 283, 298). [read post]
9 Apr 2014, 7:37 pm
Miller, Wade Henderson, Don T. [read post]
27 Feb 2010, 4:59 pm
" Id. at 388 (quoting Miller v. [read post]
16 Jun 2015, 7:22 am
Vitek Supply Corp., 144 F.3d 476, 480, 485–86 (7th Cir. 1998) (affirming denial of defendant’s Rule 702 challenge based in part upon error rates; the purpose of the inquiry into rate of error is to determine whether tests are “accurate and reliable”; here the government’s expert witnesses used adequate controls and replication to ensure an acceptably low rate of error) Phillips v. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 7:07 pm
Watkins v. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 5:06 am
Ford Presidential LibraryKristin Phillips, Public Affairs Specialist, the Gerald R. [read post]
9 Jun 2009, 7:07 pm
Watkins v. [read post]
14 Mar 2007, 11:51 am
Miller, Estella M. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 5:06 am
Ford Presidential LibraryKristin Phillips, Public Affairs Specialist, the Gerald R. [read post]
20 Nov 2011, 4:20 pm
We have had previous posts on the cases of Robins v Kordowski [2011] EWHC 981 (QB)) (seehere), Awdry, Bailey and Douglas v Kordowksi, Farrall v Kordowksi [2010] EWHC 2436 (QB) (see here), Phillips v Kordowski and Mazzola v Kordowski. [read post]
