Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay in UK Law

Leading Cases
  • Birkett v James
    • House of Lords
    • 25 May 1977

    To justify dismissal of an action for want of prosecution the delay relied upon must relate to time which the plaintiff allows to lapse unnecessarily after the writ has been issued. A late start makes it the more incumbent upon the plaintiff to proceed with all due speed and a pace which might have been excusable if the action had been started sooner may be inexcusable in the light of the time that has already passed before the writ was issued.

  • Securum Finance Ltd v Ashton and another
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 21 June 2000

    The position, now, is that the court must address the application to strike out the second action with the overriding objective of the CPR in mind – and must consider whether the claimant's wish to have "second bite at the cherry" outweighs the need to allot its own limited resources to other cases.

  • Biss v Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham Area Health Authority (Teaching)
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 15 November 1977

    The one solution that I see is that the prejudice to a defendant by delay is not to be found solely in the death or disappearance of witnesses or their fading memories or in the loss or destruction of records. There is much prejudice to a defendant in having an action hanging over his head indefinitely, not knowing when it is going to be brought to trial. Like the prejudice to Damocles when the sword was suspended over his head at the banquet.

  • Rath v C. S. Lawrence & Partners
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 18 December 1990

    For this purpose a causal link must be proved between the delay and the inability to have a fair trial or other prejudice, as the case may be.

  • Grovit and Others v Doctor and Others
    • House of Lords
    • 24 April 1997

  • Allen v Sir Alfred McAlpine & Sons Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 11 January 1968

    But also, if after the plaintiff has been guilty of unreasonable delay the defendant so conducts himself as to induce the plaintiff to incur further costs in the reasonable belief that the defendant intends to exercise his right to proceed to trial notwithstanding the plaintiff's delay, he cannot obtain dismissal of the action unless the plaintiff has thereafter been guilty of further unreasonable delay.

  • Thorpe v Alexander Fork Lift Trucks Ltd
    • Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
    • 20 June 1975

    As I said in Sweeney's case (1974) 1 W. L. R. 208, theplaintiff is not entitled to delay as of right for four years from the accident, three years before issuing the writ and another year for service. It is his duty, once the writ is issued, to serve it promptly and get on with it promptly. So in this case it was the duty of the plaintiff, having issued the writ, to serve it promptly and to proceed with the case with expedition.

See all results
Legislation
See all results
Books & Journal Articles
  • Court of Appeal
    • No. 62-3, June 1998
    • Journal of Criminal Law, The
    • 0000
    ... ... CourtofAppealto delay lodging notice of appeal against conviction until ... of process, in thatthere has been an inordinate and inexcusable delay in commencing ... ...
  • NOTES OF CASES
    • No. 31-6, November 1968
    • The Modern Law Review
    ... ... in situations where there is inordinate delay in the prosecution of an action and ... (or (b) The delay must be inexcusable.s the large number of protracted, day ... ...
  • NOTES OF CASES
    • No. 41-5, September 1978
    • The Modern Law Review
    ... ... help,s a process that adds to the delay without, usually, in the end securing ... the plaintiffs delay has been inordinate and inexcusable, to the prejudice of the ... ...
  • Arbitration
    • Construction Law. Volume III - Third Edition
    • Julian Bailey
    • 1975-2118
    ... ... hint of irony that “[a]rbitrations about delay are notoriously time consuming”. See also ... is satisied that there has been inordinate and inexcusable delay on the part of the claimant ... ...
See all results
Law Firm Commentaries
See all results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT