Lismore Builders Ltd (In Receivership) v Bank of Ireland Finance Ltd & ors [2013] IESC 6 (08 February 2013)

Lismore Builders Ltd (In Receivership) v Bank of Ireland Finance Ltd & ors [2013] IESC 6 (08 February 2013)

The High Court erred in applying the Primor test, misallocated the onus of proof, and failed to properly account for systemic and procedural delays. The delays were not inordinate and inexcusable as required for dismissal. The appeal is allowed and the claims are not struck out, but strict procedural directions are imposed.

Citation
[2013] IESC 6
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Lismore Builders Ltd (In Receivership); Plaintiff/appellant: Lismore Homes Ltd (In Receivership); Defendant/respondent: Bank of Ireland Finance Ltd; Defendant/respondent: Deloitte Haskins and Sells
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
08 February 2013
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; claims not dismissed subject to compliance with procedural directions.
Legal Topics
Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Security for Costs, Case Management, Balance of Justice
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Security for Costs Case Management 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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lismore Builders Ltd (In Receivership)

Plaintiff/appellant

Lismore Homes Ltd (In Receivership)

Plaintiff/appellant

Bank of Ireland Finance Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Deloitte Haskins and Sells

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiffs were guilty of inordinate and inexcusable delay in prosecuting their claims
  2. 2 Whether the claims should be dismissed for want of prosecution
  3. 3 Proper application of the Primor test for dismissal due to delay

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in applying the Primor test, misallocated the onus of proof, and failed to properly account for systemic and procedural delays. The delays were not inordinate and inexcusable as required for dismissal. The appeal is allowed and the claims are not struck out, but strict procedural directions are imposed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; claims not dismissed subject to compliance with procedural directions.

Orders

  • Appellants to serve compliant statements of claim (max 15 pages) within three weeks.
  • Defendants to file defences within three weeks of receipt.