Cooney -v- Mann 13-Feb-2006 [2006] JCA 025 (13 February 2006)

Cooney -v- Mann 13-Feb-2006 [2006] JCA 025 (13 February 2006)

There was inordinate and inexcusable delay, but as the prescription period in contract had not expired and the action lies in contract, the delay would have to be exceptional. The court found no reason to dissent from the Master's findings and upheld the decision to dismiss the appeal.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2006] JCA 025
Parties
Appellant: Appellant; Respondent: Respondent
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
13 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out for Want of Prosecution, Judicial Discretion, Delay in Prosecution
Civil Procedure Strike Out for Want of Prosecution Judicial Discretion Delay in Prosecution

Source-derived case record

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Appellant

Appellant

Respondent

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the action should be struck out for want of prosecution due to inordinate and inexcusable delay
  2. 2 Whether the delay has caused serious prejudice or risked an unfair trial

Ratio Decidendi

There was inordinate and inexcusable delay, but as the prescription period in contract had not expired and the action lies in contract, the delay would have to be exceptional. The court found no reason to dissent from the Master's findings and upheld the decision to dismiss the appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Master's decision upheld