Viera -v- Kordas [2014] JRC 042 (19 February 2014)

Viera -v- Kordas [2014] JRC 042 (19 February 2014)

The plaintiff's claim was struck out because there was an inordinate and inexcusable delay in progressing the case, which caused real prejudice to the first defendant and rendered a fair trial impossible. The responsibility for progressing the case lay with the plaintiff, and the defendant was not obliged to take steps to advance the plaintiff's claim.

Citation
[2014] JRC 042
Parties
Plaintiff: Plaintiff (name not specified); First Defendant: First Defendant (name not specified); Second Defendant: Motor Insurers Bureau
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
19 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Master's Order Striking Out Claim
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strike Out Applications, Delay in Proceedings, Abuse of Process, Road Traffic Accident, Limitation Period, Case Management, Human Rights
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Strike Out Applications Delay in Proceedings Abuse of Process Road Traffic Accident Limitation Period Case Management +1 more

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Plaintiff (name not specified)

Plaintiff

First Defendant (name not specified)

First Defendant

Motor Insurers Bureau

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Master's Order Striking Out Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's claim should be struck out for inordinate and inexcusable delay
  2. 2 Whether the delay caused prejudice to the defendant such that a fair trial is no longer possible
  3. 3 Whether the defendant had any obligation to progress the case

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's claim was struck out because there was an inordinate and inexcusable delay in progressing the case, which caused real prejudice to the first defendant and rendered a fair trial impossible. The responsibility for progressing the case lay with the plaintiff, and the defendant was not obliged to take steps to advance the plaintiff's claim.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Plaintiff to pay the costs of the first defendant of and incidental to the appeal on the standard basis