{"id":3905,"date":"2018-09-16T16:11:15","date_gmt":"2018-09-16T16:11:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/"},"modified":"2024-05-05T18:52:51","modified_gmt":"2024-05-05T18:52:51","slug":"termination-of-proceedings","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/","title":{"rendered":"Termination of Proceedings"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_63 counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-grey ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title \" >Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #999;color:#999\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Various_Means_of_Termination\" title=\"Various Means of Termination\">Various Means of Termination<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Dismissal_for_Delay\" title=\"Dismissal for Delay\">Dismissal for Delay<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Human_Rights_Consideration\" title=\"Human Rights Consideration\">Human Rights Consideration<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Other_Factors\" title=\"Other Factors\">Other Factors<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-5\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Statute_of_Limitations\" title=\"Statute of Limitations\">Statute of Limitations<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-6\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Vexatious_No_Reasonable_Basis\" title=\"Vexatious \/ No Reasonable Basis\">Vexatious \/ No Reasonable Basis<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-7\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Abuse_of_Process\" title=\"Abuse of Process\">Abuse of Process<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-8\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Serial_Vexatious_Plaintiff\" title=\"Serial Vexatious Plaintiff\">Serial Vexatious Plaintiff<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-3'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-9\" href=\"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/termination-of-proceedings\/#Discontinuance_and_Withdrawal\" title=\"Discontinuance and Withdrawal\">Discontinuance and Withdrawal<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Various_Means_of_Termination\"><\/span>Various Means of Termination<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Proceedings may determine other than by reason of a final court order or a settlement.\u00a0 Most of these instances, involve a default by the claimant.\u00a0 The claimant may also discontinue the proceedings either in the context of a settlement or the apprehended failure of the claim.<\/p>\n<p>However, proceedings once started, cannot be discontinued by the plaintiff\/claimant without consequences.\u00a0 By commencing legal proceedings, the plaintiff runs the risk of liability for costs to third parties, even if he terminates them unilaterally.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Dismissal_for_Delay\"><\/span>Dismissal for Delay<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Where there has been no proceeding or step in a legal action for more than a year, a party who desires to proceed must give at least one month\u2019s notice to the other \u00a0of his intention to proceed. Where there has been a inactivity for two years, the defendant may apply to have the case dismissed, \u00a0at the court\u2019s discretions. The application is made to the Master of the High Court.<\/p>\n<p>Proceedings may be dismissed by reason of delay or lack of progress in the part of the plaintiff.\u00a0 A defendant may bring an application to dismiss proceedings where the plaintiff has defaulted in delivering a statement of claim.\u00a0 A defendant may apply to have proceedings dismissed for want of prosecution or by reason of other failures on the part of the plaintiff during the course of the proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>An application can be made to dismiss proceedings on the basis that the plaintiff has not taken steps to progress the case for two years.\u00a0 The courts may dismiss proceedings where there has been an inexcusable and inordinate delay. Cases will not be readily struck out, by reason of delay.\u00a0 The primary motivation for striking out proceedings is the prejudice caused to the defendant, due to passage of time.\u00a0 The purpose is not to punish the plaintiff\/claimant.<\/p>\n<p>Even where there has been an ordinate and an inexcusable delay, the courts have discretion to decide whether on the facts, the balance of justice requires that the case be dismissed. The courts will have regard to basic fair procedures. Particular circumstances may make it unfair to the defendant to allow the action to proceed after a long and inexcusable delay. The conduct of both parties will be considered.\u00a0 If parties have acquiesced in or consented to the delay, this would be a factor against dismissal. \u00a0Ultimately, the prejudice to a fair trial is the most important factor.<\/p>\n<p>What constitutes an inordinate delay is a matter of interpretation in the circumstances. An inordinate delay will generally be one of the several years.\u00a0 The delay before the institute of proceedings itself will also be relevant. The excusability of the delay depends on the circumstances. \u00a0If there are no good reasons for the delay, the courts may dismiss proceedings.The courts balance the interest of the parties in exercising their discretion.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Human_Rights_Consideration\"><\/span>Human Rights Consideration<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>With the incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into Irish law, the case law under the Convention in relation to the right to a trial within a reasonable time, is relevant in this context.\u00a0 The Convention provides that in the determination of civil rights and obligations, everyone is entitled to a fair and public trial within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.\u00a0 Courts are not directly bound by the provision, as they are not an organ of the state.\u00a0 Nonetheless, the courts have regard to the principle of the basic right to a trial within a reasonable time, under the Convention.<\/p>\n<p>European Court on Human Rights in its case law, has reviewed the reasonableness of the lengths of proceedings in the context of the circumstances. The complexity of the case is relevant. A more complicated case may justify a longer period of preparation. The conduct of the applicant is a consideration. If he has contributed substantially to the delay, he cannot complain on the basis of the Convention. States must organise their legal system so as to ensure that proceedings are determined within a reasonable time.\u00a0 States themselves may be responsible, if they allow proceedings to continue beyond a reasonable time.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Other_Factors\"><\/span>Other Factors<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>A long delay may mean that witnesses are no longer available or that their memories have faded.\u00a0 Written documents may no longer exist.\u00a0 It may be less easy to give an accurate account of events. Witnesses may not be found or available. The fact that litigation is pending for a long period may cast a shadow on a person\u2019s professional career. Each of these may be relevant factors.<\/p>\n<p>The conduct of the defendant is relevant.\u00a0 If the defendant has himself delayed, this will weaken his application.\u00a0 If the defendant has acquiesced in delay or induced the plaintiff to incur\u00a0 further expense in continuing the action, this may counter what would otherwise be a basis for dismissal.<\/p>\n<p>Some courts have taken the view that the period between the time that the claim arose and the \u00a0date the proceedings commenced, is not a material in this context.\u00a0 However, other courts have taken the approach, based on the court\u2019s inherent jurisdiction, that a delay in commencement of proceedings may in itself or in conjunction with further post commencement delay, is relevant to the jurisdiction to dismiss the proceedings.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Statute_of_Limitations\"><\/span>Statute of Limitations<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The Statute of Limitations provides for \u00a0time limits in which proceedings must be commenced.\u00a0 Generally, commencement of proceedings within this period will not constitute an unfair burden on the defendant.\u00a0 However, in some exceptional cases, this may do so. In some cases, the Statute of Limitations may allow for a considerable period beyond the standard periods for commencement of proceedings.\u00a0 This may occur where, for example, a claimant is an infant or lacks mental capacity.<\/p>\n<p>It may happen that a claim is taken by or on behalf of children or young adults, many years after the initial incident or accident, but within the extended Statute of Limitation period.\u00a0 In some cases where there is a clear and patent unfairness in requiring the defendant to defend the claim a very long time after the events concerned, the courts may dismiss the claim on the basis of its inherent jurisdiction, \u00a0notwithstanding that it is brought within the Statute of Limitations period. A number of the cases have involved claims based on sexual abuse many years beforehand.\u00a0 In many such cases, the courts have ruled the delay to be excusable.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Vexatious_No_Reasonable_Basis\"><\/span>Vexatious \/ No Reasonable Basis<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The courts have inherent jurisdiction to strike out claims that are vexatious or have no conceivable, reasonable basis.\u00a0 The courts uphold the integrity of the legal system, by refusing to mandate that which amounts to an abuse of the process. Proceedings may be vexatious or frivolous where there is no reasonable chance of success. This being so, it is frivolous to bring the claim and the burden imposed upon the defendant makes it vexatious.<\/p>\n<p>The court may strike out individual claims or pleadings on the ground that it discloses no reasonable cause of action or defence or in any case where the claim or defence is frivolous or vexatious.\u00a0 There is separate jurisdiction which may be applied to part of pleadings, as opposed to the entire pleadings and case. The power may be exercised, where the claim as pleaded, has no legal basis and gives rise to no legal remedy.<\/p>\n<p>The courts have inherent jurisdiction to strike out claims that have no basis. The courts will not readily strike out claims, if there is any reasonable basis.\u00a0 The courts acknowledge that the facts as disclosed at the trial, may put a different complexion on the pleadings. If pleadings may be corrected or amended so as to form a reasonable basis of claim, the courts will be usually willing to make an appropriate amendment.<\/p>\n<p>The courts may look beyond the actual pleadings and seek evidence on affidavit or otherwise in relation to the matters in dispute. The fact that claimant\u2019s evidence may be weak is not relevant in this context.\u00a0 If the case as pleaded could succeed if proved, the jurisdiction is not available.\u00a0 The power will only arise where the claim would inevitably fail, even if proved as pleaded.If the claimant has no reasonable chance of success or if it the claim would not confer any tangible benefit if successful, the courts may exercise its jurisdiction to strike out the claim.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Abuse_of_Process\"><\/span>Abuse of Process<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>The courts may strike out proceedings as an abuse of process, although they will not readily do so. A claim may bee struck out, if brought for an improper purpose such as harassment or \u00a0oppression of the defendant.\u00a0 This may arise where the same or similar proceedings have already been brought, where issues are rolled forward into subsequent actions, where unsuccessful appeals have been taken, \u00a0where costs have not been paid or where parties have blatantly and persistently failed to comply with court orders.<\/p>\n<p>Claims which lack a bona fide basis, are frivolous and vexatious or are oppressive \u00a0are likely to be an abuse of process.\u00a0 A claim that appears to be proper in form, may be an abuse of process, if they are brought for a purpose which is extraneous. An abuse of process can arise in \u00a0a wide range of circumstances.\u00a0 It may be applied in cases where matters have already been adjudicated, but are not strictly \u201cres judicata\u201d (barred by final determination).<\/p>\n<p>Where proceedings are taken for tactical reasons to \u00a0discommode a rival, this may constitute and abuse. The courts may regard an action as an abuse of process where there is no tangible benefit available to the plaintiff and the principal purpose is to inflict detriment on the defendant.<\/p>\n<p>Proceedings conducted in a wholly inappropriate manner, may amount to an abuse of process. A deliberate exaggeration in a claim may constitute an abuse.\u00a0 The exaggeration may be designed to exert pressure in order to achieve an improper purpose.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Serial_Vexatious_Plaintiff\"><\/span>Serial Vexatious Plaintiff<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Where a person habitually and persistently institutes vexatious or frivolous civil proceedings, courts may use their inherent jurisdiction to make an order prohibiting the institution of proceedings by that person without the leave\/consent of court.\u00a0 These are referred to as \u201cIsaac Wunder\u201d orders, after a 1960s serial plaintiff.\u00a0 The orders protect citizens from unjustified, unnecessary harassment and expense by persistent litigants.<\/p>\n<p>Such orders are only made in very exceptional circumstances.\u00a0 The court must conclude that its processes are being abused. \u00a0Where a person institutes multiple claims on multiple occasions without any justification, an order may be made.\u00a0 It may be made against the person and connected parties, so that he may not institute proceedings indirectly through them. The order will only be granted where it is necessary and where the person concerned has habitually and \u00a0persistently brought vexatious or frivolous claims. The courts will look at the entirety of the circumstances.<\/p>\n<h3><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Discontinuance_and_Withdrawal\"><\/span>Discontinuance and Withdrawal<span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h3>\n<p>Proceedings may be discontinued and withdrawn.\u00a0 A defence can be\u00a0 withdrawn. A claim may be withdrawn without leave prior to receipt of the defendant\u2019s defence or prior to the taking of \u00a0any step in proceedings, other than an interlocutory application.\u00a0 Notice of discontinuance or withdrawal is served on the defendant.\u00a0 Proceedings may be withdrawn against some defendants without being withdrawn against others.<\/p>\n<p>Once litigation has been commenced, it may not be terminated without possible costs implications and without determination of counterclaims that may have been commenced. If the plaintiff discontinues proceedings, he must pay the defendant\u2019s cost of the actions or cost for defending the particular claim that has been withdrawn.\u00a0 This provision applies unless the court consents to the proceeding being withdrawn, other than on these terms.<\/p>\n<p>Where there are multiple plaintiffs, a single plaintiff may not withdraw without the consent of the other plaintiff or the leave of court, \u00a0if he is a necessary party.<\/p>\n<p>Where proceedings have been being settled, the plaintiff may discontinue proceedings without leave, prior to setting down of the action for trial, by filing the consent of all parties. In other circumstances, the plaintiff must make an application for leave to discontinue proceeding, which the court may grant, upon such terms as it determines \u00a0In theory, the court could refuse consent to discontinue.\u00a0 The defendant will generally be entitled to his cost up to the date of the order.<\/p>\n<p>Where proceedings have discontinued, they may be recommenced.\u00a0 However, the court has discretion to grant leave on terms that no further proceedings shall be brought.<\/p>\n<!--themify_builder_content-->\n<div id=\"themify_builder_content-3905\" data-postid=\"3905\" class=\"themify_builder_content themify_builder_content-3905 themify_builder tf_clear\">\n    <\/div>\n<!--\/themify_builder_content-->\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Various Means of Termination Proceedings may determine other than by reason of a final court order or a settlement.\u00a0 Most of these instances, involve a default by the claimant.\u00a0 The claimant may also discontinue the proceedings either in the context of a settlement or the apprehended failure of the claim. However, proceedings once started, cannot [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_exactmetrics_skip_tracking":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_active":false,"_exactmetrics_sitenote_note":"","_exactmetrics_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[423],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3905"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3905"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3905\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":35996,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3905\/revisions\/35996"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3905"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3905"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/legalblog.ie\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3905"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}