Search for: "State v. Royal" Results 161 - 180 of 2,227
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
20 May 2013, 3:18 pm by Sean Patrick Donlan
Royal Dutch Petroleum, and the International Court of Justice in Germany v. [read post]
9 Jul 2012, 2:52 pm
Thirdly, the earlier trade mark must have a reputation in the European Union, in the case of an earlier CTM, or in the Member State concerned, in the case of an earlier national trade mark. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 9:32 am
Justice O’Reilly, Omar Ahmed Khadr v. [read post]
1 Aug 2011, 1:00 am by Stephanie Smith, Arden Chambers.
  Had they done so, Her Ladyship stated that she would have agreed with the minority decision in that case. [read post]
18 Jul 2012, 3:09 am by Matrix Legal  Information Team
The Court rejected the Secretary of State’s submission the source of concessionary policies was an exercise of the Royal Prerogative, and found the source of concessionary policies to be the 1971 Act. [read post]
27 Jun 2022, 9:55 am by Jordan Zolliecoffer
The Supreme Court Takes Up the Royal Battle Over Fair Use The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the Second Circuit’s inconsistent decisions regarding fair use. [read post]
16 Jul 2011, 11:33 am by Pulat Yunusov
Do we even need a head of state? [read post]
12 Dec 2017, 5:00 am by Amanda L. Tyler
On Dec. 11, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia heard arguments in ACLU v. [read post]
12 Feb 2010, 3:07 am by traceydennis
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Gibson & Ors v Sheffield City Council [2010] EWCA Civ 63 (10 February 2010) Green v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government & Ors [2010] EWCA Civ 64 (10 February 2010) Online Catering Ltd v Acton & Anor [2010] EWCA Civ 58 (10 February 2010) Midgulf International Ltd v Groupe Chimique Tunisien [2010] EWCA Civ 66 (10 February 2010) Bascetta & Anor v Abbey National Plc [2010] EWCA Civ… [read post]
26 Sep 2014, 2:06 pm by Ryan Scoville
As the Supreme Court explained in Sosa v. [read post]
18 Nov 2009, 2:19 pm by Rosalind English
What amounts to “positive action” will no doubt depend upon the circumstances of a particular case and, in some circumstances, the state may be required to take positive steps to prevent ill-treatment at the hands of others (see, e.g., R (Bagdanavicius) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2005] UKHL 38 at [24] per Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood, E v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [2008] UKHL 66 at [44] per Lord… [read post]