Tanner -v- O'Donovan & Ors [2015] IECA 24 (24 February 2015)

Tanner -v- O'Donovan & Ors [2015] IECA 24 (24 February 2015)

The plaintiff's delay in prosecuting the proceedings was inordinate and inexcusable, and the balance of justice required dismissal due to prejudice to fair trial and professional reputation of the defendants.

Citation
[2015] IECA 24
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Tom Tanner; First Defendant/respondent: Aidan O'Donovan; Second Defendant/respondent: Elaine O'Donovan (trading as Construction Design Studio); Third Defendant/respondent: Timothy P. Murphy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against High Court Order Dismissing Proceedings for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Balance of Justice, Professional Reputation, Right to a Good Name
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Contract Law Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Balance of Justice Professional Reputation Right to a Good Name

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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tom Tanner

Plaintiff/appellant

Aidan O'Donovan

First Defendant/respondent

Elaine O'Donovan (trading as Construction Design Studio)

Second Defendant/respondent

Timothy P. Murphy

Third Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether delay in prosecuting proceedings was inordinate and inexcusable
  2. 2 Whether balance of justice required dismissal of proceedings
  3. 3 Impact of delay on fair trial and professional reputation

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's delay in prosecuting the proceedings was inordinate and inexcusable, and the balance of justice required dismissal due to prejudice to fair trial and professional reputation of the defendants.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal against High Court order dismissed; proceedings remain struck out for want of prosecution.