Personal injuries action dismissed for want of prosecution

Application to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim for want of prosecution – delay – accident at the Green Isle Hotel - over a decade since the accident and three years since the first motion to strike out for want of prosecution - inordinate and inexcusable and balance of justice test - accepted that the delay on the part of the plaintiff has been inordinate - whether the delay was excusable - potential excuses - conduct of the two other defendants - whether the first named defendant should wait for the other defendants to be prosecuted to trial - puts the onus on a defendant to look at a claim from the plaintiff’s perspective - Section 35(1) of the Civil Liability Act 1961 - concurrent wrongdoers – flawed argument - always open to the plaintiff to get on with prosecuting the proceedings - absence of a clear prognosis for the plaintiff’s spinal fusion – inexcusable delay - balance of justice - defendant applicant need only in this application establish moderate prejudice arising from that delay in order to succeed – filed defence and let sleeping dogs lie - does not assist the plaintiff - effect of delay on recall and the quality of any evidence which may be adduced - locus of the accident has long since changed - Court is left sceptical about the seriousness of the efforts made by the Plaintiff to engage with litigation - plaintiff argued that he was frustrated in his efforts to identify the other defendants - plaintiff had no option but to wait for the other defendants to engage – argued that the other defendants are the principal cause for the delay in the prosecution of these proceedings - other defendant would have to seek leave to amend their defences - still seek an indemnity and contribution against the applicant defendant - constitutional imperative to bring an end to the all too long outstanding culture of delays in litigation – plaintiff’s proceedings against the applicant defendant struck out for want of prosecution.