Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The High Court refused the defendant's application to revisit or overturn a previous judgment which had declined to dismiss the plaintiffs' claim for want of prosecution and had refused to lift an interlocutory injunction. The defendant argued that two subsequent Supreme Court decisions provided new legal principles favouring dismissal due to delay, but the High Court held that its original decision was final and could not be reopened absent extraordinary circumstances such as denial of justice or breach of constitutional rights. The court noted that while the plaintiffs had previously delayed, they had since progressed the case diligently, and that subsequent developments in the law do not justify revisiting a past final order. No factual developments warranted rehearing, and the only remedy available to the defendant would have been to appeal the earlier decision within the prescribed timeframe.
dismissal for want of prosecution – application to lift interlocutory injunction – finality of judgments – change in law after judgment – jurisdiction to review previous orders – delay in litigation – plaintiff diligence – Rules of the Superior Courts (RSC) – Articles 34.3.1 and 40.1 of the Constitution – Primor test – Supreme Court authority – functus officio – plaintiff’s litigation benefit – damages as adequate remedy – grounds for reopening final orders
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now