Search for: "Rogers v. Campbell"
Results 1 - 20
of 115
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 May 2011, 3:29 pm
Campbell Rogers as a fact witness. [read post]
17 Aug 2017, 7:03 pm
Supreme Court justice Roger B. [read post]
9 Jun 2023, 4:33 pm
Supreme Court issued a decision Thursday in Jack Daniel’s Properties v. [read post]
18 Apr 2015, 11:05 am
One approach uses Rogers for both, which makes sense since Rogers itself involved both claims. [read post]
21 Oct 2015, 5:17 am
Dec. 8, 2014, Rogers, J.) [read post]
21 May 2013, 8:30 am
S. 347 (1964), and Rogers v. [read post]
18 Aug 2017, 3:15 am
In Prigg v. [read post]
17 Apr 2015, 2:45 pm
Developing consensus around expressive uses/use of marks in expressive works, a set of doctrines prominently associated with Rogers v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 10:42 am
Sessoms & Rogers, P.A., 676 F.3d 365, 371 (4th Cir. 2012); O’Brien v. [read post]
22 Jan 2016, 10:42 am
Sessoms & Rogers, P.A., 676 F.3d 365, 371 (4th Cir. 2012); O’Brien v. [read post]
24 Nov 2010, 4:19 pm
Heather Rogers QC is a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 3:00 am
Arlin Campbell v. [read post]
26 Jun 2018, 3:00 am
Arlin Campbell v. [read post]
15 Apr 2013, 4:00 am
Awad v. [read post]
28 Aug 2023, 8:55 am
Rogers College of Law) has posted Mathias v Accor Economy Lodging: Judge Richard A. [read post]
2 Mar 2023, 7:01 am
Neither trade mark covered digital assets.The French fashion house sued Hermés for trade mark infringement, essentially referring to a risk of confusion for consumers, as well as trade mark dilution and cybersquatting.Defendant Rothschild mainly centred his counterarguments on the Roger test (as established in 1989 case Rogers v. [read post]
5 Aug 2010, 12:37 pm
Schwartz of Williams, Porter, Day & Neville, PC, Casper, Wyoming for Collins Communication, Inc.; Roger E. [read post]
29 Oct 2010, 3:57 am
In that context, it has been held that “the values enshrined in Articles 8 and 10 are now part of the cause of action for breach of confidence” (See Campbell v Mirror Group Newspapers Ltd [2004] 2 AC 457 at [17] (Lord Nicholls) and that it is necessary to consider Strasbourg jurisprudence to establish the scope of that domestic cause of action, since those Articles are now “not merely of persuasive or parallel effect” but are “the very content of… [read post]
25 Nov 2010, 4:08 pm
It was conceded by the claimant in the Naomi Campbell case that it was in the “public interest” to set the record straight about her false public statements about drug-taking (See Campbell v MGN [2004] 2 AC 457 at [24], [58] and [151]). [read post]
1 Apr 2011, 5:13 am
See Reynolds v Times Newspapers Limited [2001] 2 AC 127 HL, which created the defence, and Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Sprl [2007] 1 AC 359 HL, which revitalised it. [read post]
