Defendant acquiesced in bank’s delay in prosecuting proceedings against him

Defendant served notice of motion applying for an order dismissing the proceedings for want of prosecution and in the alternative order pursuant to the inherent jurisdiction of the court dismissing the plaintiff's claim on the ground the plaintiff has been guilty of inordinate and excusable delay in prosecuting the proceedings - summary summons was issued in April 2007 with an appearance last June 2007 - settlements agreement was reached in April 2008 which the defendants did not comply with and motion for liberty to enter final judgement was re-entered with a new date of July 2009 - in April 2010 the plaintiff consented before the Master of the High Court to the matter going to plenary hearing - the plaintiff filed their statement of claim in May 2010 and the defendant's defence was therefore due by June 2010 - defendant filed his defence in December 2010 - in 2011, 2012 and 2013 there were requests for discovery and particulars with the defendants replies to particulars being delivered in January 2013 - January 2013 until February 2016 the solicitors then acting for the plaintiff were wound up with the firm did not pass the file onto the new solicitors - in February 2016 the defendant served a notice to dismiss - this was struck out due to the defendant's failure to attend - to judgement mortgages were registered over two of the properties the defendant owned with his wife - five separate judgement mortgages were registered against the defendant - articles were published in national newspapers setting out in detail how the defendant and his wife consented to judgement being entered against them by another financial institution in the sum of €2,519,017 in July 2010 - plaintiff was not informed of first application to reinstate the motion - defendant did not show up for a motion on two occasions and they were struck out - defendants relief refused - matter to proceed by way of plenary hearing.