Re Schmidt's Trade-mark. Jackson & Company v Napper
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Court | Chancery Division |
| Year | 1886 |
| Date | 1886 |
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
14 cases
-
E. & J. Gallo Winery v Lion Nathan Australia Pty Limited
...In re Powell’s Trade Mark [1893] 2 Ch 388 followed In re Turney and Sons’ Trade Mark (1893) 11 RPC 37 cited Jackson & Co v Napper (1886) 35 Ch D 162, 4 RPC 45 considered Johnson & Johnson Australia Pty Ltd v Sterling Pharmaceuticals Pty Ltd (1991) 30 FCR 326 followed Jonathan Ross Sceats v ......
-
Pett v Greyhound Racing Association Ltd
...appoint an agent to act for him. Even a prisoner can have his friend. The general principle was stated by MR. Justice Stirling in Jackson & Co. v. Napper, (1886) 35 Chancery Division at p. 172: "…that subject to certain well known exceptions, every person who is sui juris has a right to......
-
Boord & Son v Thom & Cameron, Ltd
...(1890) 7 R. P. C. 395. 3 Sebastian, 16, 46; Kerby, 192, 365; In re MnchUNK, (1883) 50 L. T. (N. S.) 12; Jackson v. Napper, (1886) L. R., 35 Ch. Div. 162; Cowie v. HerbertSC, Jan. 16, 1897, 24 R. 4 In re Meeus' ApplicationUNK, (1890) 8 R. P. C. 25. when I find that, for half a century, goods......
-
Dabner v South African Railways and Harbours
...it. Regulation 152 (5) requires evidence to be recorded. As to the right to be represented by an agent, see Jackson & Co. v Napper (35 Ch. D. 162, at p. 172). There is a right to do anything by agent which can be done by a principal under a statute. The question of the right of audience is ......
Get Started for Free
