Carroll -v- Seamus Kerrigan Ltd & Anor [2017] IECA 66 (03 March 2017)

The appellant was guilty of inordinate and inexcusable delay, failed to advance any countervailing circumstances to excuse the delay, and the balance of justice favoured dismissal of the proceedings, particularly after a prior warning and assurance to expedite was ignored.

Citation: [2017] IECA 66
Parties: Plaintiff / Appellant: Charles Carroll; First Named Defendant: Seamus Kerrigan Limited; Second Named Defendant / Respondent: Michael Crawford (trading under the style and title of Michael Crawford and Co. Solicitors)
Jurisdiction: Ireland
Judgment Date: 03 March 2017
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Dismissing Proceedings for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Dismissal for Delay, Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay, Balance of Justice, Striking Out Proceedings

Civil Procedure Dismissal for Delay Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay Balance of Justice Striking Out Proceedings

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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2

Parties

Charles Carroll

Plaintiff / Appellant

Seamus Kerrigan Limited

First Named Defendant

Michael Crawford (trading under the style and title of Michael Crawford and Co. Solicitors)

Second Named Defendant / Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Order Dismissing Proceedings for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay

Legal Issues

1 Whether the High Court was correct to dismiss the plaintiff's claim against the respondent for inordinate and inexcusable delay
2 Whether the balance of justice favoured dismissal of the proceedings

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Order of the High Court dismissing the proceedings against the respondent affirmed