Delay in personal injuries action arising out of knife attack in prison was excusable

Personal injuries – application to dismiss for want of prosecution - inordinate and inexcusable - balance of justice - claimed that while he was a prisoner in Mountjoy Prison he was attacked by a number of fellow inmates and forcibly taken to a cell where he was slashed with a knife or blade about the face, neck and wrist - not in a position to put his solicitor in funds to obtain the necessary report –borrowed monies from parents and credit union - court is presented with circumstances of real indigence in which money has had to be borrowed from a credit union by parents so that their son’s proceedings might continue – appears his solicitor wrote to State Claims Agency stating that he advised the plaintiff to accept the State Claims Agency’s offer to discontinue legal proceedings - never obtained the necessary expert report and subsequently returned the monies – solicitor died - at no point did he intend to withdraw his claim - badly served by former solicitors - change of solicitors – argued that the State Claims Agency failed to identify any prejudice arising as a result of any delay – alleged prejudice - Governor and Chief Officer at Mountjoy Prison at the time of the alleged attack have since retired – Court found that the fact that someone has retired does not mean that he is unavailable to give evidence – argued that the longer the delay the worse the issue of witness memory will become - first motion to dismiss refused by High Court – delay not inexcusable – Court must look afresh to the entirety of the delay arising – Court can have regard to the fact that the High Court found that the delay to 2013 was excusable – regard to the fact that he is a recovered drug addict – regard to the fact that family-related developments have been a source of some distraction - applicable legal principles – Court found that there was undoubtedly an inordinate delay - having regard to his relative indigence, his period of drug addiction, and the difficulties that he has belatedly encountered and which are referred to in his second affidavit, the entirety of the period of delay in the within proceedings is excusable - court considers that the balance of justice lies greatly in favour of allowing the within proceedings to continue – State Claims Agency not at real risk of an unfair trial or an unjust result - necessary that they prosecuted with the utmost diligence.