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 the context of medical negligence proceedings, strikes out both sets of proceedings instituted by two defendants - former general practitioners to the plaintiff - against a proposed third party oncologist, as: a) the appropriate third party notices were not served by the defendants within the time limit set down pursuant to the rules of the court; b) the third party has suffered prejudice in regard to the time now elapsed since the plaintiff's medical problems were diagnosed; and c) the defendants left it far too late to obtain appropriate expert medical evidence grounding their proposed claims.
Application to set aside third party proceedings brought by defendants - Ord. 16(8)(3) RSC - medical negligence proceedings - defendants as general practitioners - third party oncologist - plaintiff diagnosed with cancer by defendants and referred to third party specialist - whether a manifest failure by plaintiff to proceed with due diligence regarding issuance of third party notice - background and timeline of proceedings - whether notices served 'as soon as is reasonably possible' - whether undue prejudice suffered by third party - whether notices should be set aside for failure to obtain appropriate expert evidence prior to their issue - applications against both defendants to be dealt with as one application given virtually identical factual template - legal principles of applications - time limit prescribed by rules - onus of proof - reasonable time - defendants' unexplained delay in obtaining expert report regarding issue of causation - substantive and logistical prejudice - third party listed as one of plaintiff's witnesses - application made on day before trial date - ill health and age of plaintiff - no proper explanation given to court regarding delay in issuing and serving notice - notices not served as soon as reasonably possible - expert evidence not obtained by first-named defendant prior to issue - third party proceedings struck out.
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