Delay in executing order for possession did not cause any prejudice to defendant

Appeal from the Circuit Court - appeal is against an order granting Mars Capital Ireland leave to issue execution in respect of an order for possession granted on 11 January 2010 – not the original plaintiff - since taken an assignment of the plaintiff’s interest in the order for possession - rules governing application for leave to execute - whether the issuance of an execution order represents an action brought upon a judgment - authority to the effect that the renewal of an order of possession is not subject to a twelve-year time-limit - grant of leave to issue execution is discretionary - fact that there has been an assignment of a judgment does not obviate the necessity to provide an explanation where that judgment has not been executed within the initial six year period - concept of delay in the context of an application for leave to issue execution is very different from that of inordinate and inexcusable delay in the context of an application to dismiss proceedings – procedural history - series of procedural mishaps – three unsuccessful applications for execution – fourth application - unable to prove service - second motion was struck out for non-attendance – third motion struck out for non-attendance – relief granted on fourth motion – appeal - said that the delay has caused specific prejudice to the defendant in that it has caused him significant stress and anxiety and has adversely affected his health - said that the delay has resulted in the imposition of legal costs on his mortgage account in a sum in excess of €9,000 – no proper engagement – whether legal test was met - emphasis was also placed on the prejudice said to have been caused to the defendant by the delay - cases in which leave to execute has been granted can conveniently be considered as falling into four broad categories - what constitutes culpable delay - Mars Capital Ireland has met the threshold of establishing a good reason which explains the failure to execute the judgment to date - not a case, where a judgment debtor had been lulled into thinking that a judgment had been abandoned and was not going to be enforced - worst that can be said of Mars Capital Ireland is that it might have pursued its attempts to secure leave to execute more efficiently - during the initial six year period, there had been constructive engagement between the original judgment creditor and the debtor for part of the time – steps taken - Mars Capital Ireland has met the threshold of establishing a good reason which explains the failure to execute the order for possession to date - satisfied that the delay in executing the order for possession has not caused any prejudice to the defendant – appeal dismissed.