Search for: "Price v. Butterworth*" Results 1 - 13 of 13
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jun 2007, 7:41 am
TML Financial Solutions Ltd v More Business Ltd and others is a decision of Mr Justice Rimer in the Chancery Division (High Court, England and Wales) yesterday. [read post]
2 Nov 2010, 1:18 am by INFORRM
A declaration of falsity was made in the case of Salman Rushdie v Evans and others in 2008. [read post]
4 Sep 2013, 10:05 am
 The Kat apologises for the Handbook's price which, at £126, would have paid for five month's rent on the apartment in Canterbury in which, in 1973, he began working on his doctorate -- but in reality it's good value for money. [read post]
25 Jan 2010, 5:00 am by Beck, et al.
" in other words, because there are so many participants in national stock markets, and those participants have such a voracious appetite for information, then anything about a particular stock is essentially instantaneously reflected in that stock’s price. [read post]
27 Feb 2007, 2:45 am
In his excitement to blog all things bright and beautiful last week, the IPKat overlooked Microsoft Corporation v P4 Com Ltd and another, a Chancery Division decision of Mr Justice Rimer last Wednesday. [read post]
1 Feb 2015, 4:06 pm by INFORRM
Holmes (2014) Fordham Intellectual Property, Media, & Entertainment Law Journal, Vol.25, No. 1, SSRN “Who Pays the Price? [read post]
5 Jan 2024, 4:00 am by Robert McKay
Around the time that Sweet and Maxwell, whose historical motto was Lux Gentium Lex (not “soap for legal gentlemen”), as the jewel in the crown of its then parent company, was acquired in 1986 by what was then International Thomson Corporation, one of the key ITO executives justified the high price paid, commenting, “you only get one crack at this sort of opportunity….we were quite bold to offer the price we did…., but then Sweet & Maxwell was a… [read post]
18 Dec 2009, 3:04 am
At US$225 it's fairly priced, given the relatively small and specialist market. [read post]
5 Nov 2020, 4:56 pm by INFORRM
They point out that in Bonnick v Morris ([2003] 1 AC 300) the Privy Council took the view that the single meaning rule could not be applied without modification when a court was considering the Reynolds defence and the question of whether a journalist had acted responsibly. [read post]
6 Sep 2007, 5:08 am
  NASA couldn't build a Saturn V today. [read post]