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 |
High Court, in personal injuries proceedings, refuses third party insurance broker's application to set aside a third-party notice served upon it by the plaintiff in excess of the period prescribed by the rules of court where, despite an inordinate and inexcusable delay on the plaintiff's part in the serving of the notice, the court is satisfied that: nothing has been identified which would render it unjust to permit the claim against the third party, and if it was set aside this would prevent all of the claims and issues in the proceedings between all three parties (plaintiff, defendant and third party) from being decided in a single action, which would serve to undermine the rationale provided for in the Rules of the Superior Courts.
Application to set aside third party notice - alleged undue delay in pursing joinder of third party - whether third party claim falls within ambit of Order 16 rule 1 RSC - principles which should be applied in relation to the joinder of a third party where claim against third party and defendant not on basis of concurrent wrongdoing - relevant facts - defendant's motion to join proposed third party brought seven months after delivery of defence - alleged failure by third party to arrange appropriate insurance - whether third party notice served within time permitted by rules - application to set aside third party notice - motion to amend title of third party notice - whether third party's application to set aside notice is misconceived as third party was not joined pursuant to the procedure under Order 16 RSC - notice not served until almost three years after period prescribed in Order 16 RSC - delay - prejudice - application to make claim against another responsive policy of insurance of plaintiff's has been lost - Order 16 RSC - claims by a defendant to contribution or indemnity - direct right to indemnity required - ambit of contribution claims - defendant's case is that an alleged failing or default on party of third party has led to defendant becoming liable for plaintiff's injuries - 'related to or connected with' - relevant connection exists between plaintiff's claim against defendant and the defendant's claim against third party - claim for damages - separate proceedings involving third party would give rise to mischief - court's discretion as to whether third party should be joined - caselaw on exercise of discretion - desirable to join third party - enables issue as between defendant and third party to be decided alongside plaintiff's claim - saving of additional cost and court time - principles applicable to delay in serving third party notice - whether there has been inordinate delay in taking a relevant step - whether that delay is excusable or inexcusable - if delay is inexcusable where does balance of justice lie - application of primor principles by analogy - delay inordinate - no explanation given for delay following expiry of time provided by rules - delay inexcusable - balance of justice lies in permitting third party claim to proceed - application to set aside refused.
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