Search for: "Commitment of M B"
Results 1421 - 1440
of 3,691
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Aug 2017, 1:17 am
This is important, since the defendants argued that there is a link between the first and the second offense (subsections a and b), which, if the offenses are separate, could not be the case. [read post]
10 Aug 2017, 9:38 am
B/c we live in a democratic society, not b/c we have preferences for news. [read post]
5 Aug 2017, 3:26 am
It is not necessary that one has been committed (by someone) before one can say that the next in line has been. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 10:00 am
Commitment means you do it even when it is hard. [read post]
3 Aug 2017, 3:24 am
On appeal from [2016] EWCA Crim 1617 The case considered whether a criminal offence can be committed under the Trade Marks Act 1994, s 92(1)(b) or (c) (selling, offering for sale or distribution/possession with a view) where the proprietor of the registered trade mark has given its consent to the application of the sign which is its registered trade mark or has itself applied its own registered trade mark to the goods, but has not given its consent to the sale, distribution or… [read post]
2 Aug 2017, 7:18 am
“Investors are often attracted to microcap companies and we are committed to protecting them from overseas manipulators and cross-border schemes. [read post]
31 Jul 2017, 1:00 am
R v M; R v C; R v T, heard 19 Jun 2017. [read post]
29 Jul 2017, 5:32 pm
¶¶ 79(a)-(m), 116, 123, 131, 150(f), 186.) [read post]
28 Jul 2017, 12:34 pm
B. [read post]
21 Jul 2017, 2:07 pm
” At first glance, Professor Volokh’s argument seems logical, but its logic is abstract: A::B as C::D. [read post]
20 Jul 2017, 1:00 pm
Ours is a profession built on commitment. [read post]
18 Jul 2017, 7:36 pm
Patricia M. [read post]
11 Jul 2017, 10:32 am
Robert M. [read post]
7 Jul 2017, 10:13 am
It seems counter-intuitive that a person commits a crime by leaving the house and passing out in the car. [read post]
6 Jul 2017, 11:30 am
To begin with, at the heart of blackmail law lies what some call the blackmail paradox: Blackmail — which I’ll define here as threatening to reveal an accurate embarrassing fact about a person unless he does what you demand — generally involves (a) threatening to do something that you have every legal right (even a constitutional right) but no legal obligation to do, in order to (b) get someone to do what he has every legal right to do. [read post]
5 Jul 2017, 2:18 pm
In a stand-your-ground state, you have committed no crime. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 12:59 pm
S. 30, 39, 48 (1994)).Secondary sources: M. [read post]
20 Jun 2017, 6:51 am
Setting aside whether that was a good argument as to our protracted air operations in Libya, I’m doubtful the argument works with the Su-22 situation given (a) the extensive U.S. ground presence in theater (especially if you include Iraq, which I think you must) and (b) the manifestly-high risk of escalation (including, of course, escalation with the Russians). [read post]
19 Jun 2017, 1:00 am
On Monday 19 June, the Supreme Court will hear the appeals of R v M; R v C; R v T. [read post]
16 Jun 2017, 1:00 am
I’m unaware of comparable cases to NTP v. [read post]
