HART v HERRON [1993] NSWCA 130

HART v HERRON [1993] NSWCA 130

Where no actual prejudice is demonstrated and the appellant bona fide wishes to prosecute the appeal, past delay alone—especially when explained by attempts to secure legal aid and acknowledged by both parties as ongoing—does not warrant dismissal for want of prosecution. Presumptive prejudice is insufficient absent specific disadvantage or abuse of process.

Parties
Appellant: Hart; Respondent: Herron; Defendant: Chelmsford Private Hospital
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 June 1993
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome
motion to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution dismissed; appeal remains on foot; other motions and costs stood over
Legal Topics
Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Delay in Appeals, Presumptive Prejudice, Practice Direction, Appeals Procedure
Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Delay in Appeals Presumptive Prejudice Practice Direction Appeals Procedure

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hart

Appellant

Herron

Respondent

Chelmsford Private Hospital

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Motion to Dismiss Appeal for Want of Prosecution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Should the appeal be dismissed for want of prosecution under Pt51 R17 of the Supreme Court Rules?
  2. 2 Does presumptive prejudice resulting from delay support dismissal of the appeal?
  3. 3 Was there an abuse of process or intentional conduct justifying dismissal?

Ratio Decidendi

Where no actual prejudice is demonstrated and the appellant bona fide wishes to prosecute the appeal, past delay alone—especially when explained by attempts to secure legal aid and acknowledged by both parties as ongoing—does not warrant dismissal for want of prosecution. Presumptive prejudice is insufficient absent specific disadvantage or abuse of process.

Court Disposition

motion to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution dismissed; appeal remains on foot; other motions and costs stood over

Orders

  • Motion to dismiss appeal for want of prosecution dismissed.
  • Question of costs and disposal of other motions stood over to 9.30 am 11 June 1993.