Keogh v. Wyeth Laboratories Inc. & Anor [2003] IEHC 84 (31 July 2003)

Keogh v. Wyeth Laboratories Inc. & Anor [2003] IEHC 84 (31 July 2003)

The delay in prosecuting the action was inordinate and inexcusable for significant periods, particularly between November 1997 and March 2000, and from March 2000 to December 2001, for which the plaintiff was responsible. The balance of justice, considering the risk of unfair trial and prejudice to the defendants, required dismissal of the action.

Citation
[2003] IEHC 84
Parties
Plaintiff: Joan Bernadette Keogh; Defendant: Wyeth Laboratories Incorporated; Defendant: John Wyeth and Brother Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Product Liability / Negligence / Interlocutory Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution or Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay
Outcome
Plaintiff's action dismissed for want of prosecution due to inordinate and inexcusable delay.
Legal Topics
Want of Prosecution, Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay, Discovery, Prejudice, Balance of Justice
Civil Procedure Tort Law Product Liability Want of Prosecution Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay Discovery Prejudice 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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joan Bernadette Keogh

Plaintiff

Wyeth Laboratories Incorporated

Defendant

John Wyeth and Brother Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Product Liability / Negligence / Interlocutory Application to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution or Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's delay in prosecuting the claim was inordinate and inexcusable
  2. 2 Whether the balance of justice required dismissal of the action for want of prosecution

Ratio Decidendi

The delay in prosecuting the action was inordinate and inexcusable for significant periods, particularly between November 1997 and March 2000, and from March 2000 to December 2001, for which the plaintiff was responsible. The balance of justice, considering the risk of unfair trial and prejudice to the defendants, required dismissal of the action.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's action dismissed for want of prosecution due to inordinate and inexcusable delay.

Orders

  • Action dismissed.