Egan v The Governor and The Company of the Bank of Ireland & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 26 (19 January 2024)

Egan v The Governor and The Company of the Bank of Ireland & Ors (Approved) [2024] IEHC 26 (19 January 2024)

The plaintiff's action against the fourth defendant is not bound to fail as there is an expert report supporting the negligence claim; delay in prosecution is excusable given plaintiff's health difficulties, multiple litigations, and lack of legal representation; no forensic prejudice suffered by the fourth defendant; balance of justice favours allowing the action to proceed.

Citation
[2024] IEHC 26
Parties
Plaintiff: Brian Egan; First Defendant: The Governor and the Company of the Bank of Ireland; Second Defendant: John G. Dillon-Leech; Third Defendant: Robert Potter-Cogan; Fourth Defendant: Sean Maloney & Associates
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
19 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence, Plenary Action / High Court, Application to Strike Out Action Against Fourth Defendant
Outcome
Application to strike out action against fourth defendant refused
Legal Topics
Delay and Want of Prosecution, Strike Out Applications, Architectural Certification, Limitation Period, Balance of Justice
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Delay and Want of Prosecution Strike Out Applications Architectural Certification Limitation Period Balance of Justice

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Egan

Plaintiff

The Governor and the Company of the Bank of Ireland

First Defendant

John G. Dillon-Leech

Second Defendant

Robert Potter-Cogan

Third Defendant

Sean Maloney & Associates

Fourth Defendant

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence, Plenary Action / High Court, Application to Strike Out Action Against Fourth Defendant

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's action against the fourth defendant discloses a cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the action is bound to fail
  3. 3 Whether there has been inordinate and inexcusable delay justifying strike out

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's action against the fourth defendant is not bound to fail as there is an expert report supporting the negligence claim; delay in prosecution is excusable given plaintiff's health difficulties, multiple litigations, and lack of legal representation; no forensic prejudice suffered by the fourth defendant; balance of justice favours allowing the action to proceed.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out action against fourth defendant refused

Orders

  • Parties to furnish written submissions on terms of final order and costs within two weeks
  • Matter listed for mention on 8 February 2024 for final orders