Because after all Gucci was only liable for the earnings made by Guess for the sale of the products which had the Quattro G design on the two-tone canvas. Right from the beginning Gucci’s argument was weak. In terms of copyright, you can’t dominate the fundamentals of fashion. But it’s still necessary to protect the smallest difference made in these basics. From what I have learned in this case is that for a trademark infringement judgment to be approved by the courts, the defendant’s damage should result in consumer confusion with the original trademark.
They made the fraud accounting which makes those people lose their savings. Community: The whole company lose community. They did not treat Enron company as the home, they just want to make their own profit from the company. Responsibility：The managers of Enron did not take responsibility when Enron have problems and the executives ignore the warning of the financial problem. No one came out and stop the action.
In United States v Bank of New England ,” the charge of willfully failing to file reports relating to currency transactions was proved because the bank’s knowledge was the totality of what all of the employees knew within the scope of their authority. The Courts Of Appeals confirmed a collective knowledge is appropriate because corporations would compartmentalize knowledge and subdivide duties and avoid liability.” Aggregation has been applied in Australian courts, but is rejected in England. The Blameworthiness
The appellants had taken goods from the selves of a supermarket and removed the price labels substituting lower priced labels that had been taken from the other goods on offer within the store. Both appellants were charged with theft, one having been apprehended having paid the price that was lower and the other as he was at the checkout. The appeals were based on the argument that their acts were inconsistent with appropriation’s true meaning in that switching price labels did not amount to an assumption of owner’s
There were not sufficient funds in the account; but the real reason for the dishonour was the bank’s knowledge that S was betting, since she was drawing cheques in favour of book-makers. The bank thought that the account was not of a type where overdrawing should be allowed. S telephoned the bank’s manager and made a grievance about the dishonour; after a while the husband took over the phone and was told that most of the cheques passing through his wife’s account were in favour of
The directors of Toyota Motors India were held responsible for the dead of one individual when the airbags in his car did not work. The case was dropped only after the company agreed to compensate the family of the deceased. Not only can lawsuits be filed against the directors by outsiders, it can be filed by the company itself and even the shareholders. A shareholder lawsuit was filed against General Motors that alleged the board of directors did not perform its duty in preventing the mounting losses from the sale of vehicles with faulty and deadly ignition switches. In Iredand a legal action against four former directors of the Irish Nationwide Building Society had to be settled out of court.
Being the sole owner of Uptown Distributors LLC. Distributing company, my client would have incurred damages in the form of profit loss due to the intentional and accidental theft of merchandise not to mention the irreversible damages inflicted to the credibility of his business and distributor clientele relationship due to the theft. All charges made would be directed towards Pops, as referenced in the rule “An employer is to be held liable for any actions and or behavior of his or her employees.” The merchandise belonging to my client intended for another customer was consciously and intentionally stolen by employees of POP 'S Barbershop, of which Pops is the sole owner. As such, Although Pops was not directly
His associates tried to influence the government and manipulate the gold market. Another corrupt thing his Associates did that Grant did not take part nor gain anything from was the Whiskey Ring, which was distillers, distributors and public officials to conspire and defraud the government of millions in liquor tax revenue. But Grant defended his private secretary without the knowledge of his role in the scandal Whiskey Ring scandal.
There are some reasons that Enron falls into bankruptcy such as lacks of transparency, accountability and disclosure. In 2000, they started to crumble and their CEO had a way called mark-to-market to hide off their financial losses from the trading business by them. They also has build their own assets but didn`t make profit from the assets instead of losses and they decided to hide their losses by transfer their assets to off book corporations and unreported to not affect the customer and investors. By this, they able to show people their profit and a great shape of the company but the truth is the company is making losses. By hiding their losses, they brought out Special Purpose Entities.
Knowingly gave false testimony on 5 December 1988 that Sng gave the $100 000 to his secretary rather than to himself. Sir Joh stated in his testimonial to the Fitzgerald corruption inquiry that he did not know where the money came from. Although he was found to have known where the money come from and was charged for perjury, the prosecution maintained that he willingly accepted the bribe. Sir Joh's former police Special Branch bodyguard gave evidence on the perjury trial that Sergeant Bob Carter accepted bribes in 1986 which were packages of cash totalling to around $210,000 at Sir Joh's office. He was instructed by Joh to take the packages to a Brisbane law firm and make sure that the money was deposited in a company bank account.