[lemma=of] [!(lemma=new | □)]
[lemma=of] [!(lemma=new | □=□)]
[lemma=of] [!(lemma=new | !□)]
" All the burden of proof is on us . They had the burden of proof , were without the constitutional protections provided in the United States , and had lost their right to a jury in a case where a jury could have been highly sympathetic . Making use of small utilities like WPS / Killer / Nuke in determing the DLL that is lodaed at run time . " Morris and Steel have had to assimilate a huge amount of legal knowledge in a short time . " Helen Steel and David Morris , whose case is before the High Court , claim that Britain 's denial of legal aid in libel cases breaches Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights - the right to a fair trial , and that inability to defend themselves against a worldwide corporation prevents them exercising the right of freedom of expression . In deciding whether or not to strike out parts of a defence and particulars of justification and fair comment in a libel case , the court 's correct approach was not to insist upon " clear and sufficient evidence " to support the pleadings , but to consider whether those parts of the defendant 's case were incapable of proof and incurably bad . The majority of participants would allow a number of activities to be carried out on their material but under some restrictions and conditions . McDonald 's is accused of conducting a campaign of legal intimidation to silence its critics . ( 1 ) the promotion of small group teaching through the funding of 60 postgraduate teaching studentships and ( 2 ) facilitating students to read outside their discipline through the establishment of 12 Broad Curriculum lectureships . The Entrepreneurship Programme has a wide range of activities to support new ventures spinning off from research and teaching in TCD , including a comprehensive training programme and the development of national and international networks of innovation . There was , in principle , no objection to an application being made to the court for a statement of claim or defence to be struck out as an abuse of process , under Order 18 , r 19 or the court 's inherent jurisdiction , on the ground that , either as disclosed in affidavits filed in support of the application , or following the exchange of witness statements under Order 38 , r 2A , the claim or defence was demonstrably incapable of proof . There was thus no objection in principle to an application being made to the court on the basis that a statement of claim or a defence should be struck out as an abuse of process because the claim or defence was incapable of proof . Initiation of legal action would publicize our intent to defend Halcion against unjust action .