Smith v Bank of Western Australia Limited

[2010] WASCA 15

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Dismissal for want of prosecution
3. › Inordinate and inexcusable delay
4. › Presumptive prejudice from delay
5. › No satisfactory explanation for delay
6. › Whether action should be struck out where delay exceeds 22 years
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Non-party intervention on appeal
3. › Application by non-party to be heard
4. › Indirect but substantial legal interest
5. › Whether non-party may be heard where parties may not fully present relevant submissions
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Costs follow the event
4. › Discretion to depart from general rule
5. › Whether circumstances justified departure

Quick Take

A delay of over 22 years since the last substantive step in proceedings, with no satisfactory explanation, will result in dismissal for want of prosecution where presumptive prejudice to the defendant is obvious and substantial. It is not necessary for the defendant to prove that a fair trial is impossible; substantial prejudice from delay is sufficient. A non-party with an indirect but substantial legal interest may be granted leave to be heard on appeal where the parties may not fully present the relevant submissions.