Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Court of Appeal, in an ex tempore judgment dismisses an appeal of three motions and: (i) upholds decision of the High Court refusing to grant the appellant judgment in default of defence and extending the time for delivering of the defence until the following day, on the grounds that: (a) the trial judge was perfectly correct in exercising her discretion in favour of extending the time for delivering of the defence; and (b) the respondent would have been entitled to respond to the appellant's amended statement of claim; (ii) upholds decision of the High Court refusing to strike out the defendant's defendant's defence for failing to comply with the Rules of the Superior Courts, on the grounds that the respondent's alleged failure not to deal with each point set out in the statement of claim is not grounds for the defence to be struck out; and (iii) upholds decision of the High Court refusing application to “estop” the defendants from pleading the Statute of Limitations against the appellant in their defence, on the ground that the Rules of the Superior Courts do not provide for the bringing of pre-emptive applications to prevent parties pleading their case as they wish in advance of them doing so.
Noonan J (nem diss): Appeal of a decision of the High Court in three motions refusing to grant the appellant judgment in default of defence and extending the time for delivering of the defence until the following day, refusing to strike out the defendant's defence for failure to comply with the rules and refusing to estop the defendant from pleading the Statute of Limitations in its defence - ex tempore judgment - the proceedings concern lands owned by the appellant in County Donegal which he alleges have been the subject matter of unlawful actions by the defendants - long history to the proceedings - the appellant brought a motion to amend his statement of claim - appellant also brought a motion seeking judgment in default of defence - time for delivering the defence was extended by 8 weeks - a defence was not delivered within that time frame - the appellant issued a second motion for judgment in default of defence - when the motion came on for hearing, the High Court refused to grant judgment in default of defence and extended the time for delivery by a day - Order 27, rule 8(1) of the Rules of the Superior Court - whether the appellant was entitled to judgment in default of defence - whether there were special circumstances explaining and justifying the failure to deliver the defence - whether the respondent's defence complied with the Rules of the Superior Courts - whether the defendant should have been estopped from pleading the Statute of Limitations - appeal dismissed.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.