Example sentences of "[verb] [prep] the plaintiffs ' [noun] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | The plaintiffs , A and others , who were customers of the defendants , obtained an injunction before Morland J. on 13 August 1990 restraining the defendants from delivering up or disclosing to the United States court or to third parties otherwise than in connection with and for the purposes of the business and trading of the plaintiffs , any documents relating to the plaintiffs ' accounts with the defendants , and ordering the latter to return to its London branch certain documents which had been removed from the jurisdiction . |
| 2 | The [ defendants ] whether by [ themselves , their ] servants or agents or otherwise howsoever be restrained until trial or further order from : ( a ) delivering up or disclosing to the grand jury in the County of New York empanelled in the matter of the People of the State of New York v. John Doe ( B Bank ) or , without the prior consent of the plaintiffs , delivering up or disclosing to any third party otherwise than in connection with and for the purposes of the business and trading of the plaintiffs or any of them , all documents and information contained therein held by [ these defendants ] at [ their ] branches in London or elsewhere within this jurisdiction concerning or relating to the plaintiffs ' accounts with the [ defendants ] or any of them or otherwise relating to the business of the plaintiffs or any of them ; ( b ) without the prior written consent of the plaintiffs ' solicitors herein , removing from the jurisdiction of this court any of the documents referred to in subclause ( a ) hereof or any copies thereof . |
| 3 | By a notice of appeal dated 18 February 1991 the second defendant appealed on the grounds , inter alia , that the judge erred ( 1 ) in concluding that the first defendant was not acting as the plaintiffs ' agent when he procured the signature of the second defendant to the legal charge dated 3 July 1987 ; and ( 2 ) in not finding that the execution of the charge was procured by the undue influence and material misrepresentation of the first defendant and thereby in not setting aside the charge . |
| 4 | ‘ The third defendant denies the plaintiffs ' claim against him but if contrary to his contentions he is held liable to the plaintiffs , he claims against you to be indemnified against the plaintiffs ' claims and the costs of this action , alternatively contribution to such extent of the plaintiffs ' claims as the court may think fit , on the grounds that ( 1 ) at all material times , you were the accountants retained by and advising the plaintiffs and each of them in respect of the proposed transaction ( and in particular the financial aspects thereof ) in relation to which the said alleged liability of the plaintiffs and each of them to [ B.M.T. ] was incurred ; ( 2 ) in about the period from January to September 1983 , you acted in breach of contract and negligently towards the plaintiffs and each of them in that you failed to advise them properly or at all with regard to the said proposed transaction and the financial aspects thereof and in particular failed to explain the full nature and extent thereof to the plaintiffs and each of them and/or failed to advise the plaintiffs as to the commercial prudence of the same and/or the risks inherent in proceeding with the same and/or failed to warn them not to enter into the same ; ( 3 ) that in so far as any financial information was or may have been communicated by the third defendant he did so in reliance upon information supplied by you . |
| 5 | Roskill J said that B was in breach of an implied duty in : ( a ) not communicating to the plaintiffs ' board the information which he received from the patent agents and in taking no steps to protect the plaintiffs against possible consequences of the existence of the patent ; and ( b ) using information regarding the patent for his own benefit . |
| 6 | By writ dated 6 August 1991 the plaintiffs in the first action , Barclays Bank Plc. claimed £389,431 from the defendants , Glasgow City Council , being moneys had and received to the plaintiffs ' use as having been paid under void contracts ; or contracts for which the consideration had totally failed ; which were traceable by the plaintiffs into the hands of the defendants , the retention of which would be unconscionable ; which would cause the defendants to be unjustly enriched ; or which the defendants held upon an implied or resulting or constructive trust in favour of the plaintiffs ; or to which the plaintiffs were entitled on the grounds that the defendants had spent the money on their lawful activities or applied them towards the discharge of their liabilities . |
| 7 | The circumstances of the breach ( which followed a previous less significant breach ) were drawn to the plaintiffs ' attention by the defendants ' solicitors by letter dated 30 April 1991 as follows : |
| 8 | The terms in which it expressed this decision are to be found in a letter dated 23 October 1991 addressed to the plaintiffs ' solicitors and written by Mr. A. D. Farries , a principal in the Crown Prosecutor Fraud Investigation Group . |
| 9 | Shortly afterwards they invited the seventh defendant who was employed by the plaintiffs ' group to join them . |
| 10 | The Bank of England was granted leave to intervene in the plaintiffs ' action on 7 May 1991 . |
| 11 | In my judgment , he would inevitably have come to the conclusion , as a matter of necessary inference , that the plaintiffs were paying and the defendants accepting the money subject to repayment if the action resulted in the plaintiffs ' favour . |
| 12 | Accordingly on 5 June 1991 Buckley J. made against various defendants orders for disclosure and discovery including an order in paragraph 18 that Mr. Tully should make and serve on the plaintiffs ' solicitors an affidavit : |