Example sentences of "[no cls] as [verb] [art] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | Our housework was hard and long and laborious and erm we 'd got two children to look after and then I 'd got my brother who did n't leave home until he was thirty and er , you had n't got the time , you know , to do too many things , so er my interest was the young wives ' and it was really a as regards the erm the Guild itself , I was thrown in at the deep end when this lady who was with my mother , mother was treasurer , she was secretary , erm she used to come down for me and , I know you should n't canvass but she used to canvass and say erm you know the voting , you know , will you , will you come and vote ? |
| 2 | " Table meal " is defined by s.139(1) as meaning a meal eaten by a person sitting at a table or other structure which serves the purpose of a table and is not used for the service of refreshments for consumption by persons not seated at a table or structure serving the purpose of a table , which definition repeats the definition given by the 1962 Act . |
| 3 | Historie can be seen as describing the past as past , and as fragmentarily reconstructed by the detached , scholarly and scientific method of the historian , ; Geschichte as describing a past which in some fashion also impinges upon and involves the present , a past which must be approached via subjective commitment rather than by a purely objective analysis of a more neutral kind . |
| 4 | Then aRa follows immediately [ since a lies in the same element of unc as does a ! ] . |
| 5 | Insofar as defining a term as a warranty prevents the innocent party terminating the contract in the event of breach , its effect may be to limit the choice of remedies available to the innocent party in the event of breach . |
| 6 | " Decompilation " is used in a wide sense and defined in section 50B as converting a copy of a computer program expressed in a low-level language into a version expressed in a higher-level language and extends to copying incidental to such conversion . |
| 7 | Erm as regards a caravan I spoke to this bloke Frank |
| 8 | By a notice of appeal dated 23 April 1992 the Treasury Solicitor appealed on the grounds that ( 1 ) on a true construction of the Evidence ( Proceedings in Other Jurisdictions ) Act 1975 the court was precluded from making the order for examination ; ( 2 ) the deputy judge had erred in law in making the order and in holding that ( i ) it was possible to interpret section 9(4) of the Act so as not to preclude the order sought , ( ii ) the exclusion contained in section 9(4) was restricted to cases where the actual capacity in which the witness was called on to give evidence was a Crown capacity and that the fact that the evidence sought was acquired in the course of the witness 's employment as a servant of the Crown was not of itself sufficient to bring the case within the exclusion , ( iii ) the fact that the witness was now retired from his position was relevant to the question whether the exclusion in section 9(4) applied , ( iv ) if some other interpretation were possible , it would be unacceptable to approach section 9(4) as requiring the court to refuse to make the order that a witness who was competent and compellable within the United Kingdom should give evidence for foreign proceedings , ( v ) there was nothing in the material sought to be given in evidence which it could have been the policy or intention of the Act to have prevented being explored ; ( 3 ) the deputy judge had erred in law in approaching the question of capacity by concentrating on the position of the witness at the time that the evidence was to be given as opposed to the position of the witness at the time that he acquired the information which was the subject matter of the evidence and the nature content and source of such evidence ; ( 4 ) the judge had wrongly ignored the fact that the Crown as a party to the Hague Convention was in a position to give effect to it and to provide evidence to foreign courts in accordance with it without recourse to the court ; and ( 5 ) the judge had wrongly approached section 9(4) on the footing that it most likely addressed prejudice to the sovereignty of the state . |