Example sentences of "[noun sg] [adv] [conj] he [verb] [be] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | He took the decision soon after he had been elected Speaker in 1983 . |
| 2 | His successor displayed no great competence for the job even though he had been a member of the House for twenty-four years and had successfully met the demands of peer review to achieve major leadership posts in the legislature . |
| 3 | A DEAF mute who was stopped by police for erratic driving told a court yesterday that he 'd been ‘ chatting ’ to his passenger in sign language . |
| 4 | A farmer facing thirty four charges of animal cruelty could n't appear in court today because he 'd been admitted to a psychiatric hospital . |
| 5 | By supporting their own candidates , they were challenging Baldwin 's authority and leadership even though he had been given a vote of confidence by the Party in 1931 . |
| 6 | Which Labour MP lost a libel action against the Observer partly because he 'd been educated at Berkhamsted School ? |
| 7 | The humiliating financial dependence on his parents , a fact of life ever since he had been dismissed from Goupil 's , was being gradually shifted on to Theo , who would soon find himself shouldering the whole burden . |
| 8 | The reason for this is that ( in many cases ) the client becomes aware of the proposed legislation either because he has been served under the General Orders with a notice as being directly affected , or because he has seen it in the local newspaper or Gazette advertisement . |
| 9 | He arrived at the Great Northern station half an hour earlier than he had been instructed and immediately reported to the sergeant who had signed him up on the previous day . |
| 10 | He 'll never let you get away with anything in a ward even if he 's been pining with unrequited love for your aunt for God knows how many years . ’ |
| 11 | It appears to me that the arguments which I have heard involve the consideration of three separate questions , namely : ( 1 ) does the ex turpi causa maxim and its related rules ( which I will refer to as ‘ the ex turpi causa defence ’ ) afford a defence to a claim for contribution under the Act of 1978 ? ( 2 ) If the ex turpi causa defence is capable of so applying , can it be said , with the degree of certainty necessary for a striking out order to be made , that the defence will exclude any contribution from the third party in the circumstances of this case ? ( 3 ) Leaving aside the ex turpi causa defence , can it be said with the necessary degree of certainty that the court will , under section 2(1) and ( 2 ) of the Act of 1978 , exempt the third party from liability to make contribution even if he has been negligent in the performance of some duty of care owed to the plaintiffs ? |