The County Court dismissed the proceeding for want of prosecution after over five years of inordinate and inexcusable delay, including at least eleven formal timetable amendments, repeated non-compliance with court orders, failure to particularise the claim, three changes of solicitor, and multiple failed or vacated mediations. The Court held that despite two prior refusals to dismiss, the cumulative history of delay and non-compliance, combined with prejudice to the defendant through increased costs, witness unavailability, and the continuing burden of unresolved litigation, warranted dismissal as a step of last resort. The plaintiff's explanations of health difficulties, financial hardship, and changes in legal representation were found insufficient where no evidence was adduced of instructions given or steps taken to ensure compliance during periods of representation.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.