Example sentences of "the defendants [noun] [prep] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Mr was well aware because he 'd been told by the plaintiffs solicitors that the plaintiffs received terms for cover or to obtain interest on their costs , the plaintiffs solicitors wrote specifically to Mr enquiring was his offer in , in the sum of forty two thousand pounds , that 's er the possible agreed settlement figure for costs , er if it was inclusive or exclusive of interest erm there were some delay but er Mr wrote back in due course making clear that interest was n't included , I should also say that in Mr er proposed bill of costs he had disallowed interest for a fairly short period in respect of both the plaintiffs bill of costs and the defendants bill of costs and the plaintiffs solicitors do n't appear to have erm taken any point on that , but as I say it , the point as to interest was specifically raised by the plaintiffs solicitors letter and er I 'm quite satisfied on the correspondence that they when it came to the matter were seen , were desires of obtaining interest in respect of their costs . |
| 2 | Mr replied that is what Mr was asking the other to do , that is to hold their hand and to enter into negotiations , now I fully appreciate that erm doctor feels strongly that the defendants have not been negotiating in good faith and have been simply dragging matters out for his benefit , now when I say that I 'm simply saying what I understand to be doctor view , I 'm certainly not suggesting that I 'm finding as a fact , but that was the decision , indeed I could n't cos I 've not heard all the evidence on this matter not as Mr to address me on that one , it seems to me with all respect to doctor missions on this matter that if there has been any dragging of feet or other improper conduct of either the defendants in connection with er they remain on in the premises and not paying what doctor would consider to be a full and proper rent or if there has been problem about their not disclosing documents when they should have done , the position is that doctor has er by making an appropriate application to the court , for maybe the appropriate relief arising out of the facts which he can establish , but that is not in general a matter which erm the court should go into on the question of taxation , it 's not , th this particular taxation of costs is a taxation as I understand it that are formally to the debt of the order of Mr Justice and there is thus no question of the court having to consider the question when the those tax those costs have been swollen or increased in any way by reason of spinning out negotiations whether to run up costs or otherwise , that simply does n't arising it seems to me in this case that maybe a matter which may arise possibly at some future date , though I would hope it would not do so , but er so far as the costs down to the end of the trial of the twentieth of March nineteen ninety one are concerned , it seems to me the fact that the parties maybe negotiating subsequently to deter to rece to resolve the outstanding issue , it 's not a matter which really goes to the question of erm what is the proper amount to allow for taxation of costs which have already been incurred , before these negotiations erm we do n't the figure of the costs appears to have been effectively agreed between the solicitors at forty two thousand pounds , the plaintiff solicitors made it quite clear that they were seeking interest , this was clear in apparently of nineteen ninety two , but this held their hand , er it seems to me the reason they held their hand rather than indicate it was because the defendant through his solicitor was asking them to do so and it seems to me that Mr was acting very sensibly in the defendants interest , because if in fact they had gone ahead and taxed their costs there and then the position would simply be that there would of been an award for taxation , in order , there would be a taxation resulting in an order for payment of of some cost probably in the region of forty two thousand pounds and er that order would itself carry interest under the judgements act , it does n't seem to me it can be sensibly said that erm any interest has to be in any way increased by reason of this delay and it seems to me that erm if one looks at order sixty two and twenty eight er certainly under paragraph B two erm there 's a reference there to any additional interest payable under section seventeen because of the failure on the May , erm , it does n't seem to me that the effect of what has in fact incurred , in this case has been , caused any additional interest to be paid and er it seems to me the only best that I can see in the evidence before me to , which would enable the court to erm , conclude that there should be a disallowance of interest would be as I say because the plaintiffs appear not to have perfected the order for the payment of perfectively two years , just over two years , erm it seems to me however that , that on balance probably it simply a matter of oversight and even if it had been perfected it would n't of made as I guess the least bit of difference to the way the negotiations er proceeded and accordingly I take the view that erm there are no grounds for disallowing interest from either the plaintiffs bill of costs or the defendants bill of costs , accordingly erm to allow the defendants appeal in preparation to the disallowance of costs er interest and to dismiss the defendants appeal for application in relation to an additional period , P sixty of course disallowed , I also propose to dismiss the sum of , the appeal by the plaintiffs from the refusal of taxing master to disallow the interest on the defendants bill of costs . |
| 3 | Mr replied that is what Mr was asking the other to do , that is to hold their hand and to enter into negotiations , now I fully appreciate that erm doctor feels strongly that the defendants have not been negotiating in good faith and have been simply dragging matters out for his benefit , now when I say that I 'm simply saying what I understand to be doctor view , I 'm certainly not suggesting that I 'm finding as a fact , but that was the decision , indeed I could n't cos I 've not heard all the evidence on this matter not as Mr to address me on that one , it seems to me with all respect to doctor missions on this matter that if there has been any dragging of feet or other improper conduct of either the defendants in connection with er they remain on in the premises and not paying what doctor would consider to be a full and proper rent or if there has been problem about their not disclosing documents when they should have done , the position is that doctor has er by making an appropriate application to the court , for maybe the appropriate relief arising out of the facts which he can establish , but that is not in general a matter which erm the court should go into on the question of taxation , it 's not , th this particular taxation of costs is a taxation as I understand it that are formally to the debt of the order of Mr Justice and there is thus no question of the court having to consider the question when the those tax those costs have been swollen or increased in any way by reason of spinning out negotiations whether to run up costs or otherwise , that simply does n't arising it seems to me in this case that maybe a matter which may arise possibly at some future date , though I would hope it would not do so , but er so far as the costs down to the end of the trial of the twentieth of March nineteen ninety one are concerned , it seems to me the fact that the parties maybe negotiating subsequently to deter to rece to resolve the outstanding issue , it 's not a matter which really goes to the question of erm what is the proper amount to allow for taxation of costs which have already been incurred , before these negotiations erm we do n't the figure of the costs appears to have been effectively agreed between the solicitors at forty two thousand pounds , the plaintiff solicitors made it quite clear that they were seeking interest , this was clear in apparently of nineteen ninety two , but this held their hand , er it seems to me the reason they held their hand rather than indicate it was because the defendant through his solicitor was asking them to do so and it seems to me that Mr was acting very sensibly in the defendants interest , because if in fact they had gone ahead and taxed their costs there and then the position would simply be that there would of been an award for taxation , in order , there would be a taxation resulting in an order for payment of of some cost probably in the region of forty two thousand pounds and er that order would itself carry interest under the judgements act , it does n't seem to me it can be sensibly said that erm any interest has to be in any way increased by reason of this delay and it seems to me that erm if one looks at order sixty two and twenty eight er certainly under paragraph B two erm there 's a reference there to any additional interest payable under section seventeen because of the failure on the May , erm , it does n't seem to me that the effect of what has in fact incurred , in this case has been , caused any additional interest to be paid and er it seems to me the only best that I can see in the evidence before me to , which would enable the court to erm , conclude that there should be a disallowance of interest would be as I say because the plaintiffs appear not to have perfected the order for the payment of perfectively two years , just over two years , erm it seems to me however that , that on balance probably it simply a matter of oversight and even if it had been perfected it would n't of made as I guess the least bit of difference to the way the negotiations er proceeded and accordingly I take the view that erm there are no grounds for disallowing interest from either the plaintiffs bill of costs or the defendants bill of costs , accordingly erm to allow the defendants appeal in preparation to the disallowance of costs er interest and to dismiss the defendants appeal for application in relation to an additional period , P sixty of course disallowed , I also propose to dismiss the sum of , the appeal by the plaintiffs from the refusal of taxing master to disallow the interest on the defendants bill of costs . |
| 4 | Whether strictly order twenty eight , er order sixty , rule twenty eight for erm applies in this case is not amount entirely clear to me because the obligation to lodge a bill of taxation under rule twenty nine provides that he must begin proceedings for the taxation either within three months after the judgement direction or order of the terminations enter sides are otherwise perfected , and that is presently on it 's face which seemed to be debited May of nineteen ninety three and er accordingly that is right , it 's not in fact been any failure to comply with order tw order sixty two , rule twenty nine , one , and that has n't been disregarded , it 's not entirely clear to me that erm there is any matter come from paragraph sub paragraph A of rule twenty eight , four , it may already require , still nevertheless erm fall within paragraph B of rule fo , erm there has in fact been a delay in lodging the bill of costs for taxation , the delay being really and truly , the delay in having the order of Mr Justice perfected and it seems to me that although in chasing matters generally speaking it is the court will itself draw the order , nevertheless where er it seems to be clearly in this case would contemplate it that counsel would sign a minute erm that counsel do sign a minute and that minute has been signed having forwarded by the defendants solicitors to the defendants solicitors seems to me it must be the case that erm the obligation to , as it were , forward that minute to the court , it is an obligation which would lie upon the plaintiffs solicitors and it maybe said that erm there has been delay and erm on the best it should be lodged with the court sealed , er shortly after it was received and that therefore on that footing there has been delay lodging the bill of costs for concession , er Mr , doctor does n't seemed to be take any point in relation to that er because it 's not in his interest to do so , it seems to be that he does have to say if it has been delayed , with an order of twenty eight rule four that 's a rule , rule , rule twenty eight er four if he is to have interest disbarred and er Mr er he 'll apparently have the matter of read before the taxing master , it seems that the taxing master did not chew any sympathy with that er suggestion , that er there was in fact no breach of the requirement rule twenty , four , Mr he said , very probably , that erm , look on text upon it , he really is concerned to erm have this case dealt with as you put it on the merits , it seems to me it 's in the interest of all parties that erm I should deal with the case on merits have on the assumption erm that er , that that was lodged properly I think , I ca I , a matter of which found within rule twenty eight , four and that the taxing officer give our interest under that rule . |
| 5 | This is the main issue of principle which I have to decide , and is one on which the defendants side with the plaintiffs against the submission on the part of the Bank of England that the answer to this question is in the affirmative . |
| 6 | The plaintiff served on the defendants notice of motion making application to the county court to commit them to prison for the alleged contempt of court entailed by breach of the injunction . |
| 7 | The plaintiffs claim that they suffered loss and damage as a result of the defendants breach of contract er my Lord erm essentially having completed on this purchase they then tried er to run the business financially and in accordance with the terms of the lease , erm but it 's all been the plaintiff 's evidence that right from the start erm he was well prepared that there was insufficient working capital and insufficient funds er to run this business properly and efficiently and indeed shortly after purchasing it advice was sought about er re-sale and er if your Lordship looks at page eighty eight of the pleadings bundle which twenty one the plaintiff 's case on page eighty eight , the top of the page my Lord . |
| 8 | Mr replied that is what Mr was asking the other to do , that is to hold their hand and to enter into negotiations , now I fully appreciate that erm doctor feels strongly that the defendants have not been negotiating in good faith and have been simply dragging matters out for his benefit , now when I say that I 'm simply saying what I understand to be doctor view , I 'm certainly not suggesting that I 'm finding as a fact , but that was the decision , indeed I could n't cos I 've not heard all the evidence on this matter not as Mr to address me on that one , it seems to me with all respect to doctor missions on this matter that if there has been any dragging of feet or other improper conduct of either the defendants in connection with er they remain on in the premises and not paying what doctor would consider to be a full and proper rent or if there has been problem about their not disclosing documents when they should have done , the position is that doctor has er by making an appropriate application to the court , for maybe the appropriate relief arising out of the facts which he can establish , but that is not in general a matter which erm the court should go into on the question of taxation , it 's not , th this particular taxation of costs is a taxation as I understand it that are formally to the debt of the order of Mr Justice and there is thus no question of the court having to consider the question when the those tax those costs have been swollen or increased in any way by reason of spinning out negotiations whether to run up costs or otherwise , that simply does n't arising it seems to me in this case that maybe a matter which may arise possibly at some future date , though I would hope it would not do so , but er so far as the costs down to the end of the trial of the twentieth of March nineteen ninety one are concerned , it seems to me the fact that the parties maybe negotiating subsequently to deter to rece to resolve the outstanding issue , it 's not a matter which really goes to the question of erm what is the proper amount to allow for taxation of costs which have already been incurred , before these negotiations erm we do n't the figure of the costs appears to have been effectively agreed between the solicitors at forty two thousand pounds , the plaintiff solicitors made it quite clear that they were seeking interest , this was clear in apparently of nineteen ninety two , but this held their hand , er it seems to me the reason they held their hand rather than indicate it was because the defendant through his solicitor was asking them to do so and it seems to me that Mr was acting very sensibly in the defendants interest , because if in fact they had gone ahead and taxed their costs there and then the position would simply be that there would of been an award for taxation , in order , there would be a taxation resulting in an order for payment of of some cost probably in the region of forty two thousand pounds and er that order would itself carry interest under the judgements act , it does n't seem to me it can be sensibly said that erm any interest has to be in any way increased by reason of this delay and it seems to me that erm if one looks at order sixty two and twenty eight er certainly under paragraph B two erm there 's a reference there to any additional interest payable under section seventeen because of the failure on the May , erm , it does n't seem to me that the effect of what has in fact incurred , in this case has been , caused any additional interest to be paid and er it seems to me the only best that I can see in the evidence before me to , which would enable the court to erm , conclude that there should be a disallowance of interest would be as I say because the plaintiffs appear not to have perfected the order for the payment of perfectively two years , just over two years , erm it seems to me however that , that on balance probably it simply a matter of oversight and even if it had been perfected it would n't of made as I guess the least bit of difference to the way the negotiations er proceeded and accordingly I take the view that erm there are no grounds for disallowing interest from either the plaintiffs bill of costs or the defendants bill of costs , accordingly erm to allow the defendants appeal in preparation to the disallowance of costs er interest and to dismiss the defendants appeal for application in relation to an additional period , P sixty of course disallowed , I also propose to dismiss the sum of , the appeal by the plaintiffs from the refusal of taxing master to disallow the interest on the defendants bill of costs . |
| 9 | right , well , I 'm , I 'm not worried about the point as to whether it arise out of cross examination , I seldom am because there is always erm can be an opportunity for further cross examination if the other party wants to , so er on the grounds of the objection I , I , I do n't uphold it you can ask that if you like , but er I do want the jury always to keep their eye on that what really is the issue in the case er certainly from the defendants point of view , I know what you say |
| 10 | The requirement effect on trade which member states of jurisdiction requirement , it is jurisdictionable because it is the first task that the commissioner of the court should undertake when considering quote from wind surfing get in constant and the concept and agreement which may effect trade is intended to define in the law governing cartels the boundary between the areas , respectively covered by community law and national law , it is not necessary law for the competition effected by the alleged restriction and the trade which is effected between members of states to be the same , an example in the defendants list of authorities it 's in the principal and in that case the restriction of competition arose in relation to a product possible spirits which was itself used to manufacture other products namely cognac , it was argued that the that since there was no trade between members of state and possible spirits there could be no effect upon trade between member of states and so twenty five could not apply , the court accepted that factual premise , there is no trade between member of state and import of spirits , but rejected the legal conclusion , they concluded that is was necessary for there to be an effect upon trade in the market where the restrictions occurred , they was trading another product which was related to possible spirits , and of course stated , it must be observed in that respect that any agreement who 's object to effect is to a strict competition by fixing minimum prices for an intermediate product is capable of effecting intro community trade , even if there is no trading in that intermediate product between members of state , that the product constitutes the raw material of another project marketing elsewhere |