Benest v Kendall [1992] JLR_Note 2d (24 February 1992)

The court's discretion to dismiss for want of prosecution is engaged where there is inordinate and inexcusable delay, and the balance of justice must be considered.

Parties: Applicant: Benest; Respondent: Kendall
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 24 February 1992
Procedural Posture: Civil / Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution
Outcome: dismissed
Legal Topics: Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Court's Discretion

Civil Procedure Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Court's Discretion

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 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Benest

Applicant

Kendall

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Dismissal for Want of Prosecution

Legal Issues

1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion to dismiss the case for want of prosecution

Ratio Decidendi

The court's discretion to dismiss for want of prosecution is engaged where there is inordinate and inexcusable delay, and the balance of justice must be considered.

Court Disposition

dismissed

Orders

Case dismissed for want of prosecution