Example sentences of "[art] defendants ' " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | The Court of Appeal dismissed the first and second defendants ' appeal against Mr Justice Vinelott 's order that the defendants permit the plaintiff 's solicitors to inspect and take copies of an affidavit in the possession of the defendants ' solicitors . |
| 2 | The second defendant was sent a photocopy of the affidavit and he sent it to the defendants ' solicitors for advice in the context of the wrongful dismissal claim . |
| 3 | Subsequently , in an unrelated claim by the plaintiff bank against the defendants , the bank sought discovery of the copy of the employee 's affidavit in the defendants ' solicitors ' possession . |
| 4 | Affidavits from the defendants ' solicitors established that the photocopy affidavit was supplied to them by the second defendant for the purposes of seeking legal advice in circumstances where litigation was contemplated , but did not indicate whether the photocopy sent was a photocopy which the second defendant made for the purpose of instructing his solicitors or a photocopy which had been sent to the second defendant by the employee himself , prepared for the employee 's own purposes which had nothing whatever to do with the defendants obtaining legal advice from their soliticors . |
| 5 | On the facts the court had no clear evidence that the copy sent to the defendants ' solicitors was made by or on behalf of the second defendant . |
| 6 | The defendants ' articled clerk handled the wife 's affairs and negotiated a financial settlement with the husband 's solicitors . |
| 7 | The wife also claimed damages for mental stress , vexation and strain caused by the defendants ' negligence . |
| 8 | In the light of the defendants ' knowledge of her state of health it was reasonably foreseeable that that would happen if they were negligent and did not obtain a satisfactory resolution of her affairs . |
| 9 | The wife was entitled to compensation for her vexation , anxiety and stress which were the direct and foreseeable result of the defendants ' negligence . |
| 10 | The court decision prohibits the destruction of books and records , and freezes the defendants ' assets . |
| 11 | The defendants ' actions were not detrimental to road safety and were exceptional cases as set out under article 11 of AETR , |
| 12 | He agreed the team had infringed the defendants ' rights when they wrote a book on the case . |
| 13 | It is a cautionary tale for all women reading this widely covered case to appreciate what is the reality of the experience , even in a case where few are likely to believe the defendants ' accounts . |
| 14 | The House of Lords unanimously allowed the defendants ' appeal . |
| 15 | The defendants ' conduct was not unconscionable , nor an interference with any legal or equitable right of the plaintiffs . |
| 16 | The defendants ' reply incorporated a disclaimer , namely that the report was ‘ without responsibility on the part of this bank or its officials ’ . |
| 17 | The plaintiffs relied upon the defendants ' report and as a result lost some £17 000 in monies owed by E on advertising contracts when E went into liquidation . |
| 18 | The House of Lords held that in the present case the defendants ' disclaimer was sufficient to exclude the assumption by the defendants of a duty of care towards the plaintiff . |
| 19 | The plaintiff was a guest at the defendants ' hotel in London . |
| 20 | The defendants denied liability , contending that an occupier 's duty of care to firemen attending his premises in the course of their work was limited to protecting the firemen from any special or exceptional risks over and above the ordinary risks necessarily incidental to a fireman 's job , and did not extend to protecting firemen from such ordinary risks which , on the facts , included an explosion of the kind which had taken place on the defendants ' premises . |
| 21 | A violent rainstorm flooded the defendants ' factory . |
| 22 | One reason for excessive caution on the part of magistrates when dealing with bail applications in the past was the lack of adequate information about defendants , their home circumstances , or the circumstances in which their offence had been committed — information which can help the court assess the defendants ' chances of absconding or re-offending while on bail . |
| 23 | It was not possible to know from the data available whether this was the defendants ' choice or magistrates declining to try them . |
| 24 | I have some hesitation in accepting the judge 's second ground for rejecting the defendants ' argument based on section 222 . |
| 25 | On the defendants ' appeal and application for leave to adduce fresh evidence : — |
| 26 | 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 |
| 27 | Held , ( 1 ) that the order for disclosure was not an order made in a proprietary claim so as to defeat the defendants ' claim to privilege against self-incrimination , nor was it a claim relating to infringement of rights pertaining to commercial information within section 72 of the Supreme Court Act 1981 ( post , pp. 351A–B , 352A , 355B , B–C , 360A , G–H , 361D–F ) . |
| 28 | Wright J. set aside paragraphs 18(a) and ( c ) and 19(a) and ( c ) of the order dated 5 June 1991 on the grounds that they infringe the defendants ' privilege against self-incrimination . |
| 29 | Your Lordships are invited to construe that benevolently in the defendants ' favour as a claim to invoke the privilege against self-incrimination on the ground that the order called upon him to disclose material which might be used in furtherance of criminal proceedings against him . |
| 30 | The order was not one for the recovery or preservation of trust property but called for information and for copies of the defendants ' documents which , so far as compliance might incriminate them , the defendants were entitled to disregard . |