Example sentences of "[prep] [noun sg] [subord] [ex0] was no " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | The surgeon will be liable in damages if he operates when there is a valid refusal of consent , and liable in damages if he fails to operate in accordance with the principle of necessity when there was no valid decision by the patient . |
| 2 | This might help to explain McKeever and Huling 's ( 1970b ) finding that reproduction of dotted designs was more accurate for stimuli presented to the left of fixation whereas there was no asymmetry for solid line designs ( Kimura and Durnford , 1974 ) . |
| 3 | It was held that he was not guilty of theft because there was no such special arrangement as would give rise to the obligation in s.5(3) . |
| 4 | The Revenue contended that there was an element of bounty because there was no obligation upon the company to pay interest . |
| 5 | She had not known what to expect from this side of marriage since there was no literature available to her on the subject and her mother had told her nothing . |
| 6 | By now Emily was out of sight so there was no way of knowing . |
| 7 | This heavy construction , which has good sound-insulating properties , provided an economic solution to the problem posed by the need to insert new floors in spite of the fact that all the beams had to be manhandled into position because there was no access for mechanical handling . |
| 8 | The Chelsea Waterworks Co. were authorised by statute to lay mains and were under a statutory duty to maintain a continuous supply of water ; it was an inevitable consequence that damage would be caused by occasional bursts and so by necessary implication the statute exempted them from liability where there was no ‘ negligence . ’ |
| 9 | Ltd. v. Hawkins ( 1859 ) 4 H. & N. 87 was authority for the proposition that it was an ordinary incident of all corporations ( including municipal corporations ) that they might sue for libel ; that case was only authority for the proposition that a trading company might sue for libel by which its property was injured ; ( 3 ) in holding that the Manchester Corporation case was decided per incuriam when there was no basis for so holding and he should have followed it ; ( 4 ) in holding that in bringing an action for libel not alleged to have caused actual damage , no valid distinction could be made between trading corporations and municipal corporations , which ignored the true basis on which a trading corporation was permitted to sue for libel , namely that it had a trading character , the defamation of which might ruin it : South Hetton Coal Co . Ltd. v. North-Eastern News Association Ltd. [ 1894 ] 1 Q.B. 133 , 145 . |