Chappell & Co Ltd v The Nestlé Co Ltd [1959] 2 All ER 701 House of Lords Nestlé‚ manufacturers of wrapped chocolate bars‚ advertised for sale‚ as part of an advertising campaign‚ the record ’Rockin’ Shoes’. The price of the record was 1s 6d plus three wrappings from their 6d chocolate bars. Chappell‚ who were the sole licensees of the copyright of ’Rockin’ Shoes’‚ claimed that Nestlé had infringed their copyright and sought injunction and damages. Nestlé claimed that they were entitled to
Premium Gramophone record Contract Sales
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS LOGISTICS‚ Vol. 25‚ No. 1‚ 2004 145 THE ROLE OF PURCHASING IN CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: A STRUCTURAL EQUATION ANALYSIS by Craig R. Carter University of Nevada‚ Reno and Marianne M. Jennings Arizona State University Researchers over the past several years have advocated that the role of logistics must expand to encompass social responsibility (Bowersox 1998; Poist 1989; Stock 1990). Most recently‚ Murphy and Poist (2002) noted that research in the area of socially responsible
Premium Supply chain management Management Business ethics
In R v Hoyle (No 2)‚ the Court considers the sentencing of the offender‚ Arthur Hoyle‚ who was found guilty of an act of indecency without consent and sexual intercourse without consent. While determining an appropriate sentence‚ the Court had reference to three medical reports tendered on behalf of the offender‚ the authors of which each had “a different speciality.” The medical history of the offender and the subsequent diagnosis provided by the medical reports presented a unique challenge to the
Premium Law Jury Judge
Case: R v. Hebert Facts of Case Judges: Dickson‚ Robert George Brian; Lamer‚ Antonio; Wilson‚ Bertha; La Forest‚ Gérard V.; L’Heureux-Dubé‚ Claire; Sopinka‚ John; Gonthier‚ Charles Doherty; Cory‚ Peter deCarteret; McLachlin‚ Beverley Neil Hebert was suspected of having robbed the Klondike Inn. After the police located Hebert‚ they placed him under arrest and informed him of his rights‚ and took him to the R.C.M.P detachment in Whitehorse. Hebert contacted counsel and obtained legal advice regarding
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Police
The New York Court of Appeals decision should be upheld in regards to Riggs et al v. Palmer case because one should not be granted inheritance by murdering one’s ancestor. For this reason‚ the New York Court of Appeals has decided on a naturalistic approach‚ which has deemed Elmer Palmer guilty for murdering his grandfather‚ thereby prohibiting Palmer from getting anything from his grandfather’s will. This essentially means that the court argues that judges use their morals in order to determine
Premium
Technology is today’s tool just like textbooks and dictionaries were the past’s tools. The way we use‚ it is an easy access. it is just faster than a textbook. Also using Technology‚ a new world opens up for us to use. In Mizuko Ito Et Al’s article “new media allow for a degree of freedom and autonomy for youth that is less apparent in a classroom setting” I believe that with the use of technology we can do anything we put our minds to. The technology allows for people who can not go to school
Premium Education Technology Science
anthem “O’ Canada” Should not be changed at all. The anthem is and always will be a big part of being Canadian‚ as well as the symbolism of Canada. The biggest thing that people remember as a kid growing is singing the national anthem in school every day and proudly standing in front of the Canadian flag. As Canada is a bilingual country it would be hard to transfer and make a new anthem that will be properly formatted for both languages without any uncanny expressions. Also as O’ Canada has been
Premium England Lester B. Pearson
R. V. Keegstra : In Support of the Dissent Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirement for PHL613‚ Philosophy of Law Sean Peters 500 204 129 April 11‚ 2012 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Overview of R. V. Keegstra 2 Why does Freedom of Speech in Democracy Matter? 2 Factors of the Offense Principle 3 Why not Moralism? 4 Philosophical Analysis 4 Criticism 6 Recommendations 7 Conclusion 8 Appendices 9 Appendix
Premium Freedom of speech Hate speech Human rights
http://www.studymode.com/subjects/souter-v-shyamba-pty-ltd-page1.html Salomon v Salomon & Co Ltd (1897)- company is a separate legal entity Lee v Lee’s Air Farming (1961) Case Summary: The facts disclosed that in 1954‚ Mr. Lee had formed the respondent company carrying on the business of crop spraying from the air. Mr. Lee owned 2‚999 of the company’s 3‚000 shares. Apart from that‚ he also was the company’s governing director whereby he had appointed himself as the only pilot of the company
Premium Employment
Case Brief By: Ashley Tam R. v. Martineau (1991)‚ 58 C.C.C. (3d) 353 (S.C.C.) Facts: The appellant‚ Martineau‚ was convicted of second-degree murder under s. 213(a) and (d) of the Criminal Code but the decision was overturned by the Alberta Court of Appeal who concluded that s. 213(a) violated ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and could no longer be in effect. The issue was brought before the Supreme Court of Canada whether or not the appeal court was correct in
Premium Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Abortion Canada