Cases Referring to this Case | Law Reform Reports Referring to this Case | Law Journal Articles Referring to this Case | Legislation Cited | Cases and Articles Cited

Help

Interpretación prejudicial del art culo 22 de la Decisión 344 de la Comisión del Acuerdo de Cartagena, solicitada por el Consejo de Estado de la República de Colombia, Sala de lo Contencioso Administrativo, Sección Primera. Interpretación de oficio de los art culos 13 literal d) y 21 de la misma Decisión. Actor: THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY Patente: "BATERIA CON CONTROLADOR INCORPORADO" (PROCESO Nº 106-IP-2002)

[2002] ACCJ 120

Court of Justice of the Andean Community

International

4th December, 2002

Cases and Articles Cited

Case Name	Citation(s)	Court †	Jurisdiction	Date	Full Text		Citation Index
1 Equitable Lawyer 5	1 Equitable Lawyer 5	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				3
2 Equitable Lawyer 21	2 Equitable Lawyer 21	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				3
3 Equitable Lawyer 28	3 Equitable Lawyer 28	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				2
4 Equitable Lawyer 26	4 Equitable Lawyer 26	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				3
5 Equitable Lawyer 30	5 Equitable Lawyer 30	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				2
6 Equitable Lawyer 17	6 Equitable Lawyer 17	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				2
7 Equitable Lawyer 30	7 Equitable Lawyer 30	Equitable Lawyer	United Kingdom				3

LawCite: Privacy | Disclaimers | Conditions of Use | Acknowledgements | Feedback