The Supreme Court dismissed Michael McGrath’s appeal against the dismissal of his personal injuries claim, finding that the appeal had been subject to inordinate and inexcusable delay. It also dismissed his motion to introduce further evidence, concluding that the proposed material would not satisfy the test for admission or probably have an important influence on the case.
The judgment, delivered by Denham J on 10 July, concerned an accident at Irish Steel in 1989. McGrath said he was holding a steel rope when he was pulled into the air. The High Court dismissed his claim in 1996, finding his account of how the accident happened incredible. The Supreme Court judgment addressed two motions before it; it did not hear or decide the appeal on its merits.
McGrath filed a notice of appeal in December 1996, but the appeal books lodged by his former solicitor did not include a transcript and were returned. The necessary appeal documents were not subsequently lodged. A 2003 motion to dismiss the appeal was adjourned on McGrath’s undertaking to lodge the documents by 31 July 2003. He did not meet that undertaking.
The court accepted that the delay was inordinate. It rejected explanations based on McGrath’s health, changes of legal representatives and efforts to investigate an alleged connection between a heart condition and the accident. The High Court had ruled on liability alone, so the court said injury and damages issues did not explain the failure to progress the appeal. It also noted that McGrath had not filed the documents needed for an appeal on liability.
McGrath sought to rely on affidavits from four proposed witnesses. The court said two proposed witnesses would say they were not present at the accident, which it considered immaterial to the central issue. It found that evidence about the work system was of little help because the High Court’s decision turned on whether the accident happened as McGrath described. The court also noted that some proposed evidence had been available at the 1996 trial.
In weighing the delay, the court noted that 17 years had passed since the accident and 15 years since proceedings began. Irish Ispat was in voluntary liquidation, its plant had closed and its workforce had been laid off. The court allowed the defendant’s motion and dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. It also refused the further-evidence motion, stating that the proposed evidence did not meet the applicable test. The underlying High Court dismissal therefore remained undisturbed.