Lescroel v Le Vesconte [2007] JRC 091 (30 April 2007)
The plaintiff and her lawyers were innocent of any significant failure to conduct the case with expedition, the failure to issue a summons for directions was excusable in the circumstances, and the interests of justice strongly favoured allowing the action to continue; therefore, the appeal was allowed and the action reinstated.
- Citation
- [2007] JRC 091
- Parties
- Appellant/plaintiff: [Name Redacted]; Respondent/defendant: [Name Redacted]
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 30 April 2007
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Master's Order Striking Out Action
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Striking Out Actions, Summons for Directions, Appeal Out of Time, Case Management
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
[Name Redacted]
Appellant/plaintiff
[Name Redacted]
Respondent/defendant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Master's Order Striking Out Action
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the action should be reinstated after being struck out for failure to issue a summons for directions under Rule 6/26(13)
- 2 Whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted
Ratio Decidendi
The plaintiff and her lawyers were innocent of any significant failure to conduct the case with expedition, the failure to issue a summons for directions was excusable in the circumstances, and the interests of justice strongly favoured allowing the action to continue; therefore, the appeal was allowed and the action reinstated.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- action reinstated
- plaintiff to attend before the Master within 14 days to fix a date for a summons for directions
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment