skip to main
|
skip to sidebar
Pages
Home
Corporate Lawyer
General Corporate Lawyer
Daiichi Sankyo - Ranbaxy
June 13 edition of
Mint
carried my column on how Daiichi Sankyo - Ranbaxy deal vindicates Indian IPR regime. Check the following link:
http://www.livemint.com/2008/06/13001424/Daiichi-Sankyo-vindicates-Indi.html
Newer Post
Older Post
Home
Popular Posts
Company Information in India
The Harvard Business School (HBS) Working Knowledge carries an interview of Professor Tarun Khanna of HBS in connection with the release o...
Strict Liability and the Nature of the Rule in Rylands v Fletcher
It is perhaps not surprising that counsel could not find a reported case since the second world war in which anyone had succeeded in a claim...
Ostensible Authority and Estoppel
The Privy Council in Kelly v. Fraser , [2012] UKPC 25, recently revisited the issue of whether an agent can be said to have ostensible autho...
Enforceability of “Side Letters”
Background It is customary for parties to enter into “side letters” in corporate and commercial transactions. Side letters are documents whi...
FDI: Shares for Consideration Other than Cash
In another of a series of discussion papers, the Department of Industrial Policy & Promotion (DIPP) has issued one on issue of shares fo...
Inter Se Promoter Exemption for Takeovers: Computation of Holding Period
A few days ago, SEBI made public its informal guidance issued to Weizmann Forex Ltd. on October 25, 2012. In this case, the tar...
Exclusion of Jurisdiction of Civil Courts under the SEBI Act
Legally India has made available certain expert witness statements filed before US Courts in the class action litigation concerning Satyam...
Service of Notice on Parties to an Indian Arbitration
In Benarsi Krishna v Karmayogi Shelters , the Supreme Court has decided that the word “party” in section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliat...
SEBI’s Proposal to Overhaul Corporate Governance Norms
SEBI has issued a consultative paper that reviews corporate governance norms in India with a view to overhauling them considering dev...
An Unfortunate Judgment: India and the Law of Restitution for Unjust Enrichment
The law of restitution for unjust enrichment* is so well developed in the common law world today that it is impossible to conceive of a cohe...
Powered by
Blogger
.
Blog Archive
►
2013
(12)
►
January
(12)
►
2012
(193)
►
December
(20)
►
November
(15)
►
October
(17)
►
September
(12)
►
August
(16)
►
July
(14)
►
June
(17)
►
May
(13)
►
April
(21)
►
March
(17)
►
February
(12)
►
January
(19)
►
2011
(194)
►
December
(18)
►
November
(19)
►
October
(9)
►
September
(12)
►
August
(22)
►
July
(16)
►
June
(13)
►
May
(15)
►
April
(21)
►
March
(14)
►
February
(22)
►
January
(13)
►
2010
(101)
►
December
(15)
►
November
(16)
►
October
(14)
►
September
(32)
►
August
(24)
▼
2008
(151)
►
July
(8)
▼
June
(12)
The Impending FCCB Conundrum
Differential Voting Rights: Some Further References
Research Paper: Achieving India’s Growth Potential
Creating Debt and Securitisation Markets in India
CSX/TCI Judgment – Some Thoughts on the SEBI Takeo...
Daiichi Sankyo - Ranbaxy
Top Law Schools
Oil Price Rise: Shareholders vs. Consumers
The Proper Purpose of a Corporation
FDI: Reporting Under Automatic Route
Differential Voting Rights: A Markets Perspective
India Today: Law School Rankings
►
May
(28)
►
April
(22)
►
March
(31)
►
February
(21)
►
January
(29)
►
2007
(8)
►
December
(8)