Example sentences of "court said that " in BNC.

  Next page
No Sentence
1 The court said that to import proportionality would ‘ create a monster that could quickly get out of control and cause widespread disruption of the many administrative processes that might attract its application ’ .
2 The Divisional Court said that this did not matter and was not caught by section 78 , which the judges stressed was concerned with no more than the narrow question of the effect of the police practice on the fairness of the proceedings in court .
3 The Court said that the effect of the acquisition must be to make any serious chance of competition practically impossible : the degree of dominance reached must be shown to have substantially fettered competition .
4 The Court said that Savory Milln may have felt some anxiety and even suspicion as to how Mr Ferriday had arranged for the £13.5m to be paid on his behalf , but it was going too far to say that any honest and reasonable man would have inferred that Mr Ferriday had misappropriated Eagle 's money in gross breach of his duty as a director or that any honest and reasonable man would not have applied the money , as Savory Milln did , in discharge of sub-underwriting liabilities until he had been satisfied that the monies were properly paid .
5 The Court said that it was not easy to see in the circumstances what other inquiries Savory Milln could have made .
6 The court said that the decision whether to close the schools was within the area of discretion left to the authority .
7 Commenting on these provisions in a case in which , through no fault of the plaintiff , process had failed to reach a defendant in France until some two months after the leaving date , a Dutch court said that ‘ the Convention subordinates the interests of plaintiffs in enforcing their rights as quickly as possible against foreign defendants to the latter 's interest in having an opportunity of defending themselves ’ .
8 The court said that it could not tell the Chief Constable how he should respond to the situation as it could not judge the explosiveness of the situation at the time .
9 In Sussex Justices the court said that " it is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done . "
10 The county court said that it was not , this interpretation being opposite to that reached by a different county court .
11 There was no evidence that the defendants were aware of the existence of those whom their conduct offended , although the court said that there was evidence from which the magistrates were entitled to infer that the appellants ‘ must have known that other people would be likely to be present . ’
12 The court said that , although in some circumstances the question whether the conduct was ‘ aimed at ’ the police may be ‘ not unhelpful , ’ that was not an essential ingredient of the offence .
13 The court said that whether the breach was a repudiatory one depended on two factors , ( i ) the ratio the breach bore quantitatively to the whole contract ( ii ) the likelihood of the breach being repeated in later instalments .
14 It is however believed that the Divisional Court said that if the only consideration for a payment by the client was a disbursement by his solicitor , different considerations might apply .
15 The Milan Appeals Court said that he should face charges — but for fraudulent bankruptcy .
16 The court said that dishonesty can be equated with immorality .
17 The court said that he was dishonest by the standards of ordinary decent people : " His conduct , judged objectively by what he has done , is dishonest . "
18 The court said that these facts gave rise to one of those rare cases where a direction on s.6(1) was needed .
19 The court said that a failure to pay a debt was not theft and held that there was no obligation to retain and deal with the money in a particular way .
20 Obiter the court said that the supply of the drug was not directed at the person of the accused .
21 The court said that it was not intended in Seymour to cast doubt on Venna which had used the Cunningham definition ( but was pre-Caldwell ) , and Venna was approved in DPP v Majewski [ 1977 ] AC 443 and seemingly by Lord Diplock himself in Caldwell .
22 Similarly , in Hall v Wandsworth Health Authority ( 1985 ) 129 SJ 188 the court said that costs could be awarded when the respondents had been dilatory in answering the plaintiffs ' solicitors ' requests for discovery with no excuse and that leave to appeal from the master 's order as to costs was not necessary .
23 In Re Hammond & Waterton ( 1890 ) 62 LT 808 the court said that if a building dispute were referred to an umpire who was a barrister the procedure would be more likely to be an arbitration , and that if the umpire were a quantity surveyor it would be more likely to be a valuation .
24 The court said that the expert should have remained aloof from the tactical discussions .
25 In Belchier v Reynolds ( 1754 ) 3 Keny 87 at 88 the court said that differences in the valuation of an estate could never be a reason to set the valuation aside , and ordered specific performance , but , as it was " a hard case on the defendants " , ordered each party to bear its own costs .
26 The court said that the parties had chosen the manner by which they wished to have their disputes resolved , and that the wording of the clause did not leave any scope for saying that , in so far as that matter was one of law , it was to be determined not by the expert but by the court .
27 The court said that there was no general rule that a valuation made on an " erroneous principle " ( which presumably means the same as a mistaken decision ) had to stand unless it were also shown that a valuation on the right principle would produce a materially different figure from the figure of the erroneous valuation : if there were such a rule , it would place on the objector the extra burden of making a fresh valuation which in its turn might also be rejected .
28 In Boynton v Richardson 's [ 1924 ] WN 262 , the court said that surveyors appointed under a contract to value timber had to " hold the scales " between the two parties and were quasi-arbitrators , and had to be able to exercise their judgment free from the embarrassment of a possible action for negligence .
29 The court said that in the circumstances of that case the auditor could not have been expected to act as a specialist valuer , and was therefore not liable for failing to reach that higher standard .
30 The court said that because the articles showed that the auditors were not to be called in until the parties showed they were in disagreement , the auditors were to act as arbitrators .
  Next page