Showing 3011 - 3020 of 3913 for "Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co" with applied filters
Intellectual property
Intellectual property
Dispute resolution
Dispute resolution
03 June 2026 by Anand and Anand - India
Trade Marks Office Rejects ‘Bigstone’ Mark in Win for Bridgestone; Finds Adoption of Bridgestone-Like Branding Unfair and Likely to Confuse Consumers
28 May 2026 by SyCip Salazar Hernandez & Gatmaitan - Philippines
On 11 March 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released for public comment its draft memorandum circular entitled “Guidelines Lifting the Moratorium on Online Lending Platforms and Prescribing Prudential, Disclosure, and Market Conduct Requirements for Financing and Lending Companies” (Draft Circular).
19 May 2026 by Kim & Chang - South Korea
On behalf of KAMUT Enterprises of Europe (BV, “KEE”), the owner of the trademark for the global premium grain brand “KAMUT,” Kim & Chang prevailed in the lawsuit on the merits, the preliminary injunction action, and the IPTAB trials in Korea.
19 May 2026 by Kim & Chang - South Korea
Kim & Chang represented Korean Air as global merger filing counsel in relation to its KRW 1.8 trillion acquisition of approximately 63.9% of shares in Asiana Airlines, both global network full-service carriers. Our firm provided multi-jurisdictional merger filing analysis and obtained clearance from all of the jurisdictions where the merger was notified, including Korea, the EU, the US, Japan and China. The merger was finalized in December 2024.
19 May 2026 by Kim & Chang - South Korea
In a lawsuit filed by Company M’s franchisees (the “Plaintiffs”) against the franchisor (the “Defendant”) seeking restitution for unjust enrichment, Kim & Chang represented the Defendant from the initial trial to the final appeal to the Supreme Court. Our firm identified critical flaws in the Plaintiffs’ arguments and defended the client through an in-depth review of the franchise agreement and relevant legal principles. We prevailed across all levels of the judiciary.
15 May 2026 by Rahul Chaudhry & Partners - India
The concept of intermediary liability under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (“IT Act”) first germinated at a time when intermediaries, broadly defined to include persons who, on behalf of another person, receive, store or transmit electronic records or provide services in relation to such records , were largely perceived as passive facilitators enabling access to information. Consequently, India’s intermediary liability framework was originally built on the understanding that digital platforms should be shielded from automatic liability arising out of third-party content.
