Example sentences of "[prep] [art] plaintiffs [unc] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Er , my Lord you will see that there are cash flow forecasts which relate to the business er back statements for the plaintiffs er and then there are documents and papers which are referred to in Mr report and finally on the final page of the index there are the principal sources of information for Mr report . |
| 2 | And , while the general right of beneficiaries to inspect trust documents was recognised in In re Londonderry 's Settlement [ 1965 ] Ch. 918 as being a proprietary right , that case does not provide support for the plaintiffs ' contention in the instant appeal . |
| 3 | The plaintiffs claim damages from a number of defendants , including the third defendant , under the following heads : ( 1 ) general damages for conspiracy ; ( 2 ) exemplary damages on the basis that the acts complained of were calculated to make a profit for the conspirators or their companies and constituted a cynical disregard for the plaintiffs ' rights ; and ( 3 ) damages for deceit as an alternative to damages for conspiracy . |
| 4 | This can be demonstrated in Vacwell Engineering Co Ltd v BDH Chemicals [ 1971 ] 1 QB 88 where a chemical supplied by the defendants , although fit for the plaintiffs ' purposes , exploded on contact with water , though this was unknown to the plaintiffs . |
| 5 | 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 . |
| 6 | 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 . |
| 7 | The Crown Prosecution Service were informed of Buckley J. 's order and of the plaintiffs ' intention to appeal from the decision of Wright J. , and were asked whether they wished to intervene or make representations in the appeal . |
| 8 | ‘ I am concerned that if I now have to respond fully to that part of the plaintiffs ' order of 5 June dealing with the various alleged payments my position vis-à-vis the police investigation may well be prejudiced . |
| 9 | It is enough if there be just and reasonable grounds for apprehending that unless payment be made an unlawful and injurious course will be taken by the defendant in violation of the plaintiffs ' actual rights . |
| 10 | 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 . |
| 11 | On 13 October 1988 an order was made by Master Munrow directing the trial as a preliminary issue of certain questions arising out of the plaintiffs ' notice of objection . |
| 12 | Held , dismissing the appeal , that the liability imposed under section 1(1) of the Act of 1978 was intended by Parliament , by virtue of section 6(1) of the Act , to enable claims for contribution to be made as between parties who had no claim for contribution under the general law , and applied whenever a plaintiff had a cause of action against a third party in respect of the same damage as gave rise to his cause of action against the defendant , irrespective of the legal basis of the liability ; and that , accordingly , the defence of ex turpi causa non oritur actio could not be relied upon in answer to a claim for contribution under the Act ; and that , since there was sufficient possibility of the third party being found liable for some part of the plaintiffs ' loss , there were no grounds for striking out the third party notice ( post , pp. 1022H — 1023A , G–H , 1024G — 1025D ) . |
| 13 | ‘ 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 . |
| 14 | The plaintiffs contended that they had thereby been deprived of the opportunity to bid for H.F. Co. but pill J. rejected their claim because while the law certainly allowed a freedom to bid for property that was neither a ‘ business asset ’ of the plaintiffs ' nor a legal right which the law would protect . |
| 15 | Moreover he found that a concession made in the pleadings to the effect that the plaintiffs did not allege that the defendants had made use of any of the plaintiffs ' trade secrets since leaving their employment was , in the light of the judgment of Faccenda Chicken Ltd v Fowler [ 1986 ] 1 All ER 617 fatal . |
| 16 | There was no evidence that the employees had misused any of the plaintiffs ' business secrets . |
| 17 | On leaving the plaintiffs , the defendant set up another company which sold heaters of a similar type to some of the plaintiffs ' previous customers . |
| 18 | The restriction has to be justified in this case as being reasonably required for the protection of the plaintiffs ' trade secrets by preventing the defendant from disclosing confidential information imparted to him by the plaintiffs in the course of his employment … |
| 19 | The transparencies were delivered together with a copy of the plaintiffs ' standard terms . |
| 20 | The third defendant issued a third party notice against the plaintiffs ' accountant claiming an indemnity or contribution in the event of the third defendant being held liable to the plaintiffs , on the ground that the accountant had negligently failed to warn the plaintiffs of the risks inherent in the defendants ' transactions . |
| 21 | ‘ 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 . |
| 22 | In Marshall ( Thomas ) ( Exporters ) Ltd v Guinle [ 1978 ] 3 WLR 116 whilst managing director of the plaintiffs and without their knowledge or consent , the defendant placed orders for the benefit of himself and his own company with the plaintiffs ' suppliers . |
| 23 | But the principal credit goes to our legal team for identifying at the outset the essential weakness in the plaintiffs ' case . |
| 24 | The fallacy in the plaintiffs ' argument lay in the assertion that the challenged paragraphs of the order of Buckley J. constituted a proprietary remedy and not a mere order for discovery . |
| 25 | 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 . |
| 26 | The Bank of England was granted leave to intervene in the plaintiffs ' action on 7 May 1991 . |
| 27 | In the plaintiffs ' opinion this seriously affected their privacy and thus breached the covenant of " non-derogation from grant " , since the ground-floor had been let as a dwelling house . |
| 28 | The defendants had both received training in the plaintiffs ' business , including familiarisation with the contents of two manuals . |
| 29 | Holmes J. recognised that it might not be possible to establish the forfeiture without quo warranto but considered that even before or until such a proceeding the effect of the clause upon the plaintiffs ' business could be serious , and ( 2 ) the incurring of a penalty which would continue to accrue and accumulate pending litigation should the plaintiffs ultimately fail . |
| 30 | 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 . |