Search for: "Jones v. Tate"
Results 21 - 40
of 55
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 May 2020, 4:06 pm
The issue of readers flouting copyright was highlighted last month when Guardian columnist Owen Jones used his Twitter feed to publish almost an entire Sunday Times investigation into the UK government’s handling of the Covid-19 crisis. [read post]
16 Feb 2020, 4:52 pm
The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2020] EWCA Civ 104 (heard 21 and 22 January 2020). [read post]
9 Feb 2020, 4:05 pm
Last Week in the Courts On 4 to 7 February 2020 Warby J heard the trial in the case of Sube v News Group Newspapers. [read post]
17 Feb 2019, 4:06 pm
On 12 February 2019 Mann J handed down judgment in the case of Fearn & Ors v The Board of Trustees of the Tate Gallery [2019] EWHC 246 (Ch) which was an Article 8 and nuisance claim arising out of the fact that the claimants’ flats are overlooked by a viewing platform at the Tate Gallery. [read post]
15 Dec 2018, 12:34 pm
Jones, No. 114,601 (Sedgwick)K.S.A. 60-1507 appeal (petition for review)Kristen B. [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 3:33 am
”The relevant case law for commandments 1 to 10 seems to be: Fylde Microsystems Ltd v Key Radio Systems Ltd [1998] FSR 449 Levy v Rutley (1871) (1871) LR 6 CP Tate v Thomas [1921] 1 Ch 503 Wiseman v George Weidenfeld & Nicolson Ltd [1985] FSR 525 Fylde Microsystems… [read post]
1 Dec 2017, 2:25 am
”The relevant case law for commandments 1 to 10 seems to be: Fylde Microsystems Ltd v Key Radio Systems Ltd [1998] FSR 449 Levy v Rutley (1871) (1871) LR 6 CP Tate v Thomas [1921] 1 Ch 503 Wiseman v George Weidenfeld & Nicolson Ltd [1985] FSR 525 Fylde Microsystems Ltd v Key Radio… [read post]
30 Nov 2017, 2:04 am
In concluding that Kogan had not sufficiently contributed to the screenplay [para 85], even by adding to the first three drafts, Hacon J considered the following points and authorities: Adding elements not themselves covered by copyright, such as scenic effects, is not a sufficient contribution (as per Tate v Thomas [1921] 1 Ch 503)Providing helpful criticism and expert feedback on the work is not a sufficient contribution (as per Wiseman v George Weidenfeld… [read post]
23 Oct 2017, 4:21 am
Here is the opinion in Paquin v. [read post]
6 Jun 2017, 3:25 pm
Jones. [read post]
3 Dec 2016, 7:00 am
Sarah Tate Chambers rounded up the latest developments in cybercrime. [read post]
9 Feb 2016, 9:47 am
Hausman v. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 7:08 am
No Island of Sanity: Paula Jones v. [read post]
4 Aug 2014, 5:53 am
Jones, supra).State v. [read post]
31 Mar 2014, 7:35 am
Jones v. [read post]
18 Oct 2013, 8:30 am
Set for argument December 5th Objections to a charge made after the charge conference; Jones Act liability KING FISHER MARINE SERVICE, L.P. v. [read post]
30 Sep 2013, 3:35 pm
In EEOC v. [read post]
9 Apr 2012, 3:35 am
Tate; victim gave a new statement indicating defendant wasn’t the shooter, and factors of prejudice and timing weighed in defendant’s favor… Bullshit Traffic Stop of the Week™: in State v. [read post]
27 Nov 2011, 11:13 am
In Howard-Jones v Tate, the UK Court of Appeal has vehemently answered this question in the negative, reasserting the distinction between rescission and repudiatory breach forcefully laid down by Lord Wilberforce in Johnson v Agnew. [read post]
25 Nov 2011, 1:37 am
High Court (Criminal Division) Hall, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2753 (24 November 2011) Levesconte v Regina [2011] EWCA Crim 2754 (24 November 2011) DM, R. v [2011] EWCA Crim 2752 (24 November 2011) Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Howard -Jones v Tate [2011] EWCA Civ 1330 (24 November 2011) Pattni v First Leicester Buses Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1384 (24 November 2011) High Court (Administrative Court) Bibb v Bristol City Council… [read post]
