Example sentences of "[art] defendants ' [noun sg] " in BNC.

  Next page
No Sentence
1 He alleged that , the same day , he advised the solicitors of the payment and , on July 8 , the defendants ' clerk ; but that , in breach of the agreement , the bankruptcy notice was served on him .
2 This submission is the kernel of the defendants ' case .
3 The defendants ' case was not entirely met , however , by the interpretation of ‘ rent reserved ’ as meaning the rent agreed and not the rent actually payable .
4 that while injury to Lonrho 's business was foreseeable it was not the defendants ' purpose to bring it about .
5 The defendants ' conduct was not unconscionable , nor an interference with any legal or equitable right of the plaintiffs .
6 The defendants ' conduct in subsequently honouring the advertisement was irrelevant as it occurred after the offence had been committed .
7 Mr. Ratcliffe , the defendants ' expert , was also helpful .
8 The wife also claimed damages for mental stress , vexation and strain caused by the defendants ' negligence .
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 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 .
11 The plaintiff was a guest at the defendants ' hotel in London .
12 This had not been appreciated by the defendants ' chairman who had considered the advertisement for some 5 to 10 minutes before approving it , but who had not sufficiently thought through the implications of it .
13 It was also stated that a ‘ scam ’ had been running for quite some time prior to the defendants ' involvement .
14 Second , there is the issue of the manner in which the defendants ' entitlement is to be quantified in relation to ( a ) litigation costs and ( b ) non-litigation costs .
15 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
16 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 .
17 APPEAL ( No. 6 of 1991 ) with leave of the Court of Appeal of Bermuda by the plaintiff , Horace Brenton Kelly , from the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Bermuda ( Blair-Kerr P. , Roberts and Henry JJ.A. ) given on 30 November 1989 allowing an appeal by the defendants , Margot Cooper and Helen Cooper ( trading as Cooper Associates , a firm ) from the judgment of Hull J. delivered on 14 November 1988 in the Supreme Court of Bermuda ( Civil Jurisdiction ) , whereby he awarded the plaintiff $200,000 damages for breach of contract and made a declaration that the defendants were not entitled to commission on the sale of the plaintiff 's property , and the defendants ' counterclaim for commission was dismissed .
18 This is an appeal from a judgment dated 30 November 1989 of the Court of Appeal of Bermuda ( Blair-Kerr P. , Roberts and Henry JJ.A. ) allowing an appeal from a judgment of Hull J. dated 14 November 1988 of the Supreme Court of Bermuda ( Civil Jurisdiction ) awarding the plaintiff , Mr. Kelly , damages in the sum of $200,000 , declaring that the defendants , a firm of estate agents trading as Cooper Associates , were not entitled to commission on the sale of the plaintiff 's property , Caliban , and dismissing the defendants ' counterclaim for such commission .
19 He told the plaintiffs that he had two paintings by Munter for sale and accordingly an employee of the plaintiffs visited the defendants ' gallery to view the paintings .
20 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 .
21 It is obviously irrelevant to speculate on what if anything was in the mind of the clerk or other subordinate officer who actually received the money , or in the mind of the officer ( whoever he or she may have been ) who paid it into the bank to the defendants ' credit .
22 It was not possible to know from the data available whether this was the defendants ' choice or magistrates declining to try them .
23 A violent rainstorm flooded the defendants ' factory .
24 Conversely , if United States shippers were to sue the carriers in Great Britain , where most of the sources of information on the defendants ' diligence and assets were located , they would be bound by exemption clauses that the United States courts had voided .
25 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 .
26 It is therefore my opinion that on his findings of fact in the present case , the judge was entitled to hold , as he did , that the defendants ' promise to pay the extra £10,300 was supported by valuable consideration , and thus constituted an enforceable agreement .
27 the defendants ' solicitor reasonably believed that the plaintiff 's solicitor had waived the privilege that attached to the reports .
28 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 .
29 I have some hesitation in accepting the judge 's second ground for rejecting the defendants ' argument based on section 222 .
30 The essence of the defendants ' argument is the alleged identity , in all respects , and for every purpose , between the defendants and the company .
  Next page