Search for: "CAMPBELL v. STATE INDUSTRIAL COURT" Results 41 - 60 of 269
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
1 Mar 2021, 5:34 am by Ben Millson (Bristows)
Normal service looks to have been resumed following the Court of Appeal judgment in IPCom v Vodafone [2021] EWCA Civ 205, in which Arnold LJ reversed a first instance finding by Recorder Douglas Campbell QC that Vodafone was entitled to a defence of Crown use in respect of certain acts which infringed an IPCom patent, as well as providing some interesting commentary on the application of the de minimis infringement defence. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 4:32 am by Siobhan Hayes
This post was written by Siobhan Hayes and Katherine Campbell A High Court case reported this week shows how difficult it can be for tenants to operate a conditional break clause in a lease. [read post]
20 Jan 2009, 3:18 pm
Well, folks, that kind of claim handling is why they own those big buildings in most downtown metropolitan cities.Ever since the 2003 decision in State Farm v Campbell, the courts have been restricting the availability of punitive damages as a deterrent to big business fraud, greed and just plain stupidity.What we said before about Dead Donkeys and Car Dealers (click here) is still true. [read post]
25 Apr 2016, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Campbell v Gordon (Scotland), heard 11 April 2016. [read post]
27 Jun 2016, 1:47 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Campbell v Gordon (Scotland), heard 11 April 2016. [read post]
9 May 2016, 12:05 am by Anthony Fairclough
Campbell v Gordon (Scotland), heard 11 April 2016. [read post]
13 Jun 2016, 1:00 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Campbell v Gordon (Scotland), heard 11 April 2016. [read post]
13 Sep 2016, 2:40 pm by Steven Boutwell
  The Legislature has never hesitated to expressly state its intent to legislatively overrule a Louisiana Supreme Court decision, when that is indeed its intent. [read post]
18 Apr 2016, 1:03 am by Matrix Legal Support Service
Campbell v Gordon (Scotland), heard 11 April 2016. [read post]
25 May 2010, 8:52 am by David M. McLain
For that same reason, it was also opposed by the American Subcontractors Association of Colorado.It was passed in response to a 2009 court decision in General Security Indemnity v. [read post]
The California Supreme Court expressly rejected the Ninth Circuit’s “narrow restraint” exception to section 16600 espoused in Campbell v. [read post]