Example sentences of "[prep] [art] defendants " in BNC.

  Next page
No Sentence
1 Nigel Davis ( Norton Rose ) for the defendants ; John Mowbray QC and Claire Staddon ( Lovell White Durrant ) for the plaintiff bank .
2 It was argued for the defendants that the wife would not be liable to tax on the damages she received , while her lost income would have been taxable in her hands , and that therefore she should be awarded damages in respect of her net loss after deducting tax .
3 It was also argued for the defendants that the example of judges in personal injuries cases should be followed , and the wife should give credit for amounts of supplementary benefits received .
4 Mr Anthony Scrivener , QC , for the defendants , said he would be seeking leave to appeal to the House of Lords .
5 When Professor Tidy sat down , worse was to come for the defendants , as a plethora of witnesses placed every permutation of the four in or about the vicinity at various times that evening .
6 The remedy granted by the High Court is an injunction , a discretionary remedy and a very serious one for the defendants , which may result in closure of the premises without compensation if that is the only way in which the nuisance can be abated .
7 for the defendants .
8 Mr. Lester , for the defendants , sought to persuade us that a local authority could not be guilty of the crime of corruption and that the Manchester Corporation case was correctly decided .
9 The submissions for the defendants included the following : ( i ) a local authority , such as the council , is controlled by elected councillors and the ability to control such a council by the vote of the majority of councillors is the objective of political activity .
10 The main thrust of Mr. Lester 's submissions for the defendants has never previously been considered in the context of libel .
11 and K.P.E. Lasok for the defendants .
12 and William Flenley for the defendants .
13 The Court of Appeal dismissed the plaintiffs ' appeal from Wright J. 's order , holding that it was not open to the court to devise protection in substitution for the defendants ' privilege against self-incrimination , and that the plaintiffs ' claim was neither proprietary nor within section 72 of the Supreme Court Act 1981
14 ( 3 ) Allowing the appeal ( Lord Griffiths dissenting ) , that in view of the terms of the letter from the Crown Prosecution Service , in which it was accepted that the order restricted them to utilising material already collected or independently gathered , and the safeguards contained in paragraph 33 of Buckley J. 's order , the compliance with the order for disclosure would not create any real danger for the defendants of prejudice in criminal proceedings ( post , pp. 353G–H , 354A–B , 358G–H , 359C–E , 360A , 362G–H , 364E–H ) .
15 I hope that it is not too perfunctory a way of dealing with this interesting point to say that in my opinion it is comprehensively answered by the judgments in Bishopsgate Investment Management Ltd. v. Maxwell [ 1992 ] 2 W.L.R. 991 which Mr. Rawley , for the defendants , brought to your Lordships ' attention .
16 I now come to what I regard as the plaintiffs ' most convincing argument , namely , that paragraph 33 of Buckley J. 's order , combined with the letter dated 23 October 1991 from the Crown Prosecution Service , provides effective protection for the defendants against the criminal consequences of having to disclose incriminating information or documents by virtue of paragraphs 18(a) and ( c ) and 19(a) and ( c ) of the order .
17 and Michael Douglas for the defendants .
18 S. Ltd. 's solicitors had purported to act for the defendants in the transaction but , unknown to the bank , had had no authority from the defendants to do so .
19 and Ali Malek for the defendants .
20 The 14 March 1988 order provided a timetable for service by the plaintiffs of notice of objection and for the defendants to reply thereto .
21 It is accepted by Mr. Potts , for the defendants , that the quantification of litigation costs must be by means of a taxation carried out by a taxing master and that the taxation must be conducted on one or other of the two bases prescribed by Ord. 62 , r. 12 .
22 Mr. Cullen , we notice , appeared for the defendants .
23 The order recited that the court had heard ‘ counsel for the plaintiffs and for the defendants and …
24 Jonathan Tecks for the defendants .
25 The Court of Appeal set aside that judgment and entered judgment for the defendants on their counterclaim .
26 ( of the Bermuda Bar ) for the defendants .
27 In the Court of Appeal , the judgment below was set aside and judgment was entered for the defendants on their counterclaim .
28 The trial judge sensibly obtained the agreement of counsel for the defendants to the case proceeding on the basis of defined issues .
29 The Court of Appeal therefore allowed the appeal , dismissed the plaintiff 's claim and gave judgment for the defendants on their counterclaim .
30 One of the arguments for the defendants was that there had been no theft because the plaintiff had agreed to the transaction with the rogue and reliance was placed on Lord Roskill 's statement in Reg. v. Morris , at p. 332 , that appropriation
  Next page