Judgment: 2017-05-02 · Court archive

High Court orders plaintiff to list witnesses in long-running case

A case-management ruling set a 14 June 2017 deadline for the plaintiff’s witness list and any discovery application. The court warned that non-compliance could lead to the proceedings being struck out.

High Court · [2017] IEHC 252

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Kevin Tracey
  • Karen Tracey (Plaintiff)
  • The Master of the High Court
What

A case-management ruling set a 14 June 2017 deadline for the plaintiff’s witness list and any discovery application. The court warned that non-compliance could lead to the proceedings being struck out.

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Why

Read the report below for the decision and any reasons given.

The High Court has ordered the plaintiff in a long-running case to provide a list of intended witnesses and an estimate of trial time by 14 June 2017. The court said it would propose striking out the proceedings if the direction was not complied with.

Mr Justice Eagar made the directions in a case-management ruling dated 2 May 2017 in proceedings brought by Kevin Tracey and Karen Tracey against multiple defendants. The ruling concerns case number 6407 P of 2006 and follows a claim relating to events alleged to have occurred on 28 May 2001. The judge noted that the plaintiff was unrepresented and a lay litigant.

The court was acting under rules that allow it to require parties to estimate trial length and identify witnesses. The ruling says the Courts Service’s counsel applied under section 42 of the Superior Courts (Conduct of Trials) Rules 2016. The judge said the proceedings required active case management to help secure their expeditious disposal.

The court also directed the plaintiff to apply by 14 June 2017 for any discovery sought in the case. The ruling records that discovery had been ordered by the Master of the High Court and requested from the Courts Service on 6 January 2009, but had not been obtained. It refers to a document the plaintiff provided to the court on 6 February 2017.

The judge said the defending parties would later be required to provide their own trial-time estimates and witness lists. This ruling did not decide the underlying dispute or determine any discovery application.

The court said it was then dealing only with case 6407 P of 2006. It planned a case-management conference on 19 May 2017 for three other jury-trial cases: 7939 P and 8488 P of 2007, and 1840 P of 2008. The parties were also expected to be ready to address cases 11092 P and 11094 P of 2008 at that conference, with another date to be set if needed.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review