Toye v Donegal County Council & Ors (Approved) [2023] IEHC 427 (14 July 2023)

Toye v Donegal County Council & Ors (Approved) [2023] IEHC 427 (14 July 2023)

The delay by the plaintiff was both inordinate and inexcusable, but the first defendant failed to establish even moderate prejudice resulting from the delay. The balance of justice lies in favour of refusing to strike out the plaintiff’s claim.

Citation
[2023] IEHC 427
Parties
Plaintiff: Rose Toye; First Defendant: Donegal County Council; Second Defendant: Electricity Supply Board; Third Defendant: Eircom Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
14 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Motion to Strike Out for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay/want of Prosecution
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Inordinate Delay, Want of Prosecution, Balance of Justice, Prejudice, Strike Out Applications
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Inordinate Delay Want of Prosecution Balance of Justice Prejudice Strike Out Applications

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rose Toye

Plaintiff

Donegal County Council

First Defendant

Electricity Supply Board

Second Defendant

Eircom Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Motion to Strike Out for Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay/want of Prosecution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim should be struck out for inordinate and inexcusable delay and/or want of prosecution
  2. 2 Whether the balance of justice favours striking out the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The delay by the plaintiff was both inordinate and inexcusable, but the first defendant failed to establish even moderate prejudice resulting from the delay. The balance of justice lies in favour of refusing to strike out the plaintiff’s claim.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • Reliefs sought by the first defendant in its notice of motion dated 8 September 2022 are refused.