Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Once upon a time, the relationship between insurer and insured was one of contract and was governed by the terms and conditions of the policy. Even after common law modifications of this common law relationship and legislative regulation of the parties' consensual relationship, it still is fundamentally based on agreement of the parties.
Justice J. Dale Wainwright, concurring, in the 2005 decision of the Texas Supreme Court in Excess Underwriters at Lloyds v. Frank's Casing Crew & Rental Tools, Inc., 2005 WL 1252321 (decided May 27, 2005) (citations omitted).
Justice Wainwright's concurrence appears prophetic, for in a series of recent decisions, the Texas Supreme Court has refused to imply terms or conditions in an insurance contract, even if it had strong equitable or public policy reasons to do so. The Texas court is an influential one, so its 'show me the language' approach could be coming to a court near you.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?