Example sentences of "[prep] [art] plaintiffs [unc] " in BNC.
Previous page Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 31 | Walton J. did not purport to decide the case on the basis of a payment made under a mistake of law and I agree with the doubts expressed by Romer J. in Twyford v. Manchester Corporation [ 1946 ] Ch. 236 , 241 , as to this being a true case of money paid under a mistake of law having regard to the plaintiffs ' expressions as to their understanding of the law at the time of the payments . |
| 32 | Secondly , is the fact that there was no separate independent advice fatal to the plaintiffs ' claim ? |
| 33 | 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 . |
| 34 | 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 . |
| 35 | 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 : |
| 36 | The 14 March 1988 order recorded that accounts had already been supplied to the plaintiffs and that those accounts had discharged the first defendant 's accounting obligations ‘ subject only to the plaintiffs ' rights under Ord. 43 , r. 5 of the Rules of the Supreme Court 1965 and their rights to require vouching of the said accounts . ’ |
| 37 | 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 . |
| 38 | Owing to a rainfall of extraordinary violence , the stream overflowed at the pond , and a great volume of water , which would normally have been carried off by the stream , poured down a public street into the town and caused damage to the plaintiffs ' property . |
| 39 | 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 . |
| 40 | On the plaintiffs ' originating summons for a declaration that the ombudsman did not have jurisdiction to investigate and determine the borrowers ' complaints : — |
| 41 | On the plaintiffs ' appeal : — |
| 42 | 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 : |
| 43 | On the plaintiffs ' appeal and the defendants ' cross-appeal on the ground that the plaintiffs were not entitled to object to the amount of any costs in the accounts unless the court had deprived the defendants of the relevant costs : — |
| 44 | The plaintiffs brought an action for damages against the defendants for , inter alia , conspiracy to defraud the plaintiffs by the obtaining of inflated fees and commission payments in respect of a number of property transactions conducted by the defendants on the plaintiffs ' behalf . |
| 45 | On 9 November 1990 , in an action by the plaintiffs claiming damages against the defendants for conspiracy to defraud in respect of a number of property transactions conducted by the defendants on the plaintiffs ' behalf , the third defendant issued a third party notice against J. , an accountant who had advised the plaintiffs , claiming an indemnity or , alternatively , a contribution to such an extent as the court might think just , on the ground of the third party 's alleged failure to properly advise the plaintiffs in relation to the transactions . |
| 46 | The jury negatived negligence and found that there was contributory negligence on the plaintiffs ' part , and Hawke J. held that there was no conversion , for the defendants had acted reasonably . |
| 47 | Shortly afterwards they invited the seventh defendant who was employed by the plaintiffs ' group to join them . |