Search for: "Arnold v. Clarke" Results 1 - 20 of 93
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 Dec 2015, 9:11 am by Stephanie Smith, Arden Chambers
Following on from the Case Preview (here), the Supreme Court handed down judgment in Arnold v Britton & Ors on 10 June 2015 in which the appellants’ appeal was dismissed by a majority of 4-1. [read post]
17 Nov 2020, 11:15 am by Alex Woolgar
Arnold LJ focused on a point made clear by Lord Hoffmann in Douglas v Hello! [read post]
30 Oct 2014, 4:33 pm
Yesterday the Supreme Court (Lords Neuberger, Mance, Clarke, Sumption and Toulson) dismissed the appeal. [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 7:35 am
Gilead claimed that Pharmasset Barbados was the successor in title to Mr Clark the inventor, and thus able validly to claim priority under the Paris Convention, by virtue of the employment contract of Mr Clark, and an agreement between the two Pharmasset companies. [read post]
26 Jul 2018, 12:11 am
This shows just how fast the court system can be when there is a need for speed.Dsclmr - I used to have the pleasure of working with Arty Rajendra and Nick Kempton (now both at Osborne Clarke) who acted for LNDR together with Charlotte Groom also at Osborne Clarke and Douglas Campbell QC and Georgina Messenger of Three New Square. [read post]
8 Feb 2017, 6:30 am by Tom Pritchard
Court of Appeal decision In overturning the decision of first instance, Lord Justice Clark (with whom Lady Justice Gloster and Lord Justice Patten agreed) relied on the following reasons: In reviewing the case law regarding contractual interpretation (Arnold v Britton [2015] UKSC 36 and Gan Insurance Co Ltd v Tai Ping Insurance Co Ltd [2001] CLC 1, 103 being particularly significant) it can be said that “the clearer the language the less appropriate it may… [read post]
5 Jan 2012, 3:36 am by Russ Bensing
  Back in 1994, in State v. [read post]
22 Apr 2012, 6:48 am
The recent decision of the Hamburg Regional Court on GEMA v. [read post]
20 Nov 2012, 10:04 am
That was the opening sentence of Mr Justice Arnold's judgment in Interflora, Inc. [read post]
1 Oct 2018, 7:40 pm by Brian Shiffrin
” If a juror’s statements during voir dire raise a doubt about his impartiality, such as statements that he has a pre-formed opinion about the case, that juror cannot be permitted to sit unless he states unequivocally that he can be fair and decide the case solely on the evidence adduced at trial (People v Johnson, 17 NY3d 752, 753 [2011]; People v Chambers, 97 NY2d 417, 419 [2002]; People v Arnold, 96 NY2d 358, 362-363 [2001]; People v… [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:36 am
 In the brand-new Court of Appeal decision just out - Actavis UK Ltd & Others v Eli Lilly & Company [2015] EWCA Civ 555 (25 June 2015), Lord Justice Floyd (Lords Justices Kitchin and Longmore concurring) disagreed with Arnold J on two main issues. [read post]
28 Nov 2017, 2:57 am
’ Mr Justice Arnold considered that – on the basis of the case law – the lack of intention to use can be proof of bad faith. [read post]