Proceedings struck out where plaintiff has failed to make any effort to prosecute it at all

First and second defendants motion to strike out proceedings on the grounds of inordinate and inexcusable delay - O. 122, r. 11 of the Rules of the Superior Courts - inherent jurisdiction - further seeking to vacate the lis pendens registered over the property - plaintiff plenary summons summarised as constituting a claim to beneficial ownership of the property - in respect of charges on property - claim for orders restraining 1st and 2nd defendant from taking steps to realise the securities over the property - the plaintiff never delivered a statement of claim - plenary summons issued 2019 - over 4 years delay - court found this meant no opportunity for 1st and 2nd defendants to bring proceedings onwards - 1st and 2nd defendants had no option but to bring this motion - 1st and 2nd defendants prejudiced as unable to assess strength of claim against them - further prejudiced as lis pendens frustrates right of sale over the property - court notes that a removal of lis pendens only would not be enough - required to dismiss proceedings - court finds the delay is inexcusable - no excuse or reason was provided for such a delay - balance of justice weighs in favour of dismissing the claim - court identified proceedings brought for the purpose of frustrating the lender and the receiver from realising the security in the property - in relation to lis pendens - vacated for failure to prosecute claim expeditiously.