Keating -v- Riordan & ors [2016] IEHC 635 (09 November 2016)

Keating -v- Riordan & ors [2016] IEHC 635 (09 November 2016)

Claims against the second and third defendants are struck out due to concrete and irremediable prejudice caused by the plaintiff's delay, making a fair trial impossible. The claim against the first defendant is not struck out as the prejudice is not sufficient, the defendant does not aver to memory loss or inability to defend, and the balance of justice favours allowing the claim to proceed. The statute bar issue cannot be determined without oral evidence and is deferred to trial.

Citation
[2016] IEHC 635
Parties
Plaintiff: Henry Keating; First Defendant: Tom Riordan; Second Defendant: City of Cork Vocational Education Committee; Third Defendant: John Buckley
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
09 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury (sexual Assault) / Interlocutory Motion to Strike Out for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay/statute Bar
Outcome
Claims against the second and third defendants dismissed; claim against the first defendant to proceed to trial; statute bar issue deferred to trial.
Legal Topics
Sexual Abuse Claims, Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay, Strike Out Applications, Statute of Limitations, Disability Under Limitation Statutes
Tort Law Civil Procedure Limitation of Actions Sexual Abuse Claims Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay Strike Out Applications Statute of Limitations Disability Under Limitation Statutes

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 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Henry Keating

Plaintiff

Tom Riordan

First Defendant

City of Cork Vocational Education Committee

Second Defendant

John Buckley

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury (sexual Assault) / Interlocutory Motion to Strike Out for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay/statute Bar

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proceedings should be struck out against each defendant for inordinate and inexcusable delay
  2. 2 Whether the proceedings are statute barred under the Statute of Limitations (Amendment) Act 2000

Ratio Decidendi

Claims against the second and third defendants are struck out due to concrete and irremediable prejudice caused by the plaintiff's delay, making a fair trial impossible. The claim against the first defendant is not struck out as the prejudice is not sufficient, the defendant does not aver to memory loss or inability to defend, and the balance of justice favours allowing the claim to proceed. The statute bar issue cannot be determined without oral evidence and is deferred to trial.

Court Disposition

Claims against the second and third defendants dismissed; claim against the first defendant to proceed to trial; statute bar issue deferred to trial.

Orders

  • Strike out claim against second defendant (City of Cork VEC)
  • Strike out claim against third defendant (John Buckley, Bishop)