Example sentences of "[was/were] [adj] only [prep] a [noun] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Soviet leaders were interested only in a kind of ‘ non-alignment ’ for Afghanistan comparable with that of the radical pro-Soviet members of the Non-Aligned Movement ; they did not hanker for Afghan neutralism of the pre-1973 variant . |
| 2 | The burst of social legislation prior to 1914 was possible only within a context in which the most obvious social evils of the day , such as the poverty caused by old age , sickness and unemployment , had been identified and shown to be amenable to State action . |
| 3 | The night was so dark that the end of the trench was perceptible only as a lightening of the murk , where the ditch of the town lay ahead . |
| 4 | The period is 27 years , and the eclipse lasts for a long time ; the last began on 22 July 1982 and did not end until 25 June 1984 , though it was total only for a year ( January 1983 to January 1984 ) . |
| 5 | Standing in the queue were problems of the economy , of the development of the productive forces , which , with regard to agriculture , was conceivable only in a form of the growth of petty-bourgeois economy . |
| 6 | The huge sphere of its forward compartments was visible only as a nothingness in the star-filled field of space — a circle of darkness more intense than that which surrounded it . |
| 7 | Since it was believed to be worth over £13,000 it was an amazing bargain , but one which was available only to a purchaser with immense cash reserves . |
| 8 | They argued that sinners were quite unable to attain salvation through their own merits or through the long process of confession , repentance , and partial purification , and that justification or redemption was obtainable only at a stroke through the gift of faith from God made possible by Christ 's sacrifice . |
| 9 | By notice of appeal dated 22 April 1992 the father appealed on the grounds , inter alia , that ( 1 ) the judge was wrong in law to reject the submission that any consideration of the children 's welfare in the context of a judicial discretion under article 13 ( a ) of the Convention was relevant only as a material factor if it met the test of placing the children in an ‘ intolerable situation ’ under article 13 ( b ) ; ( 2 ) the judge should have limited considerations of welfare to the criteria for welfare laid down by the Convention itself ; ( 3 ) the judge was wrong in law to reject the submission that in the context of the exercise of the discretion permitted by article 13 ( a ) the court was limited to a consideration of the nature and quality of the father 's acquiescence ( as found by the Court of Appeal ) ; ( 4 ) in the premises , despite her acknowledgment that the exercise of her discretion had to be seen in the context of the Convention , the judge exercised a discretion based on a welfare test appropriate to wardship proceedings ; ( 5 ) the judge was further in error as a matter of law in not perceiving as the starting point for the exercise of her discretion the proposition that under the Convention the future of the children should be decided in the courts of the state from which they had been wrongfully removed ; ( 6 ) the judge , having found that on the ability to determine the issue between the parents there was little to choose between the Family Court of Australia and the High Court of England , was wrong not to conclude that as a consequence the mother had failed to displace the fundamental premise of the Convention that the future of the children should be decided in the courts of the country from which they had been wrongfully removed ; ( 7 ) the judge also misdirected herself when considering which court should decide the future of the children ( a ) by applying considerations more appropriate to the doctrine of forum conveniens and ( b ) by having regard to the likely outcome of the hearing in that court contrary to the principles set out in In re F. ( A Minor ) ( Abduction : Custody Rights ) [ 1991 ] Fam. 25 ; ( 8 ) in the alternative , if the judge was right to apply the forum conveniens approach , she failed to have regard to the following facts and matters : ( a ) that the parties were married in Australia ; ( b ) that the parties had spent the majority of their married life in Australia ; ( c ) that the children were born in Australia and were Australian citizens ; ( d ) that the children had spent the majority of their lives in Australia ; ( e ) the matters referred to in ground ( 9 ) ; ( 9 ) in any event on the facts the judge was wrong to find that there was little to choose between the Family Court of Australia and the High Court of England as fora for deciding the children 's future ; ( 11 ) the judge was wrong on the facts to find that there had been a change in the circumstances to which the mother would be returning in Australia given the findings made by Thorpe J. that ( a ) the former matrimonial home was to be sold ; ( b ) it would be unavailable for occupation by the mother and the children after 7 February 1992 ; and ( c ) there would be no financial support for the mother other than state benefits : matters which neither Thorpe J. nor the Court of Appeal found amounted to ‘ an intolerable situation . ’ |
| 10 | The landlord , partially blinded as he turned from sunlight into gloom , was aware only of a shadow ; a stirring of air ; a faint dull patter mixing into the rowdy mob-noise , and something brushing featherlight against his thigh as he waddled down the passage . |