The High Court has allowed the Courts Service of Ireland seven days to regularise its late defence in a negligence action brought by Agnieszka Nowak, refusing her motion for judgment in default of defence.
In an ex tempore judgment delivered on 1 April 2025, Ms Justice Nuala Jackson said the defence had already been delivered out of time and that Nowak had held it since 5 February. The judge extended the time for delivery by seven days under Order 27, rule 9 of the Rules of the Superior Courts.
The judge did not determine the underlying negligence dispute. She said she had only affidavit evidence on the confined issue before her and could not make findings about the substantive claim. The Courts Service was not a party to the earlier litigation that formed the background to Nowak’s allegations.
The agreed timeline showed that the plenary summons and statement of claim were issued and served on 6 September 2024. After the defence deadline passed, Nowak sent a letter allowing a further 28 days for delivery, expiring on 2 December. The Courts Service sought particulars on 26 November; its counsel accepted that request did not stop the clock. Nowak replied on 29 November.
On 4 December, the Courts Service said the defence was at an advanced stage and asked her not to issue a default motion so soon after the replies. Nowak said the delay was unacceptable and proceeded with the motion the following day. The parties later disagreed over a proposed extension.
Justice Jackson said the applicable question was whether an extension was necessary in the interests of justice. She cited the short, non-inordinate delay, the prompt handling of particulars, ongoing communication, and the fact that this was the first motion in proceedings progressing with reasonable expedition. She found no substantial prejudice to Nowak, while saying substantial prejudice would be caused to the Courts Service if it could not defend the claim. The judgment records that the judge considered the defence’s delivery out of time and Nowak’s possession of it since 5 February in reaching her decision.
The court indicated no order as to costs, while giving either party liberty to apply within seven days if dissatisfied. The judgment does not state that judgment was entered on the negligence claim or determine liability or damages.