High Court refuses an application by the second and third named defendants to set aside the renewal of a Personal Injury Summons granted following an ex parte application, on the grounds that: (a) there was good reasons to renew the summons; (b) although the failure to serve the summons had been due to the inadvertence of the plaintiff's solicitor, the period of delay of 10 weeks was short enough to persuade the Court that the balance of justice favours upholding the decision to renew the summons; and (c) the plaintiff's solicitor had written to the defendant before the expiry of the 12-month period informing them of the intended proceedings prior to the expiry of the 12-month period.
Application to set aside the renewal of a summons - medical negligence - Order 8, Rule 1 of the Rules of the Superior Courts - test for the renewal of a summons - the plaintiff alleges medical negligence against the defendants prior to and following the birth of her child - the plaintiff issued proceedings on 13 March 2018 but did not serve them within the 12 month period - whether there were special circumstances which justified an extension - the High Court, following the ex parte application, renewed the summons on the basis of the complexity of the case and the plaintiff’s requirement to obtain specialist and expert reports to proceed with the matter - High Court in this application found that this was not the reason for the delay in serving the summons but instead it was due to inadvertance on the part of the plaintiff's solicitor - the Court must consider the interests of justice between the parties where appropriate as well as any prejudice to each party when deciding whether to renew a summons - Court concluded that there was special circumstances justifying an extension of time to seek to renew the Summons and good reason to renew the Summons - application refused.