The High Court has struck out James Graham’s personal injuries proceedings against CPL Healthcare Ltd and Tusla arising from an alleged assault by a service user at a residential facility in August 2016.
In a judgment delivered on 13 January 2026, Mr Justice Max Barrett held that Graham had been responsible for substantial periods of inordinate and inexcusable delay in progressing his case and that the proceedings should end for want of prosecution.
Graham issued a personal injuries summons seeking damages for injuries he says arose from an assault on 25 August 2016. He alleges negligence, breach of contract, breach of duty and breach of statutory duty by the defendants. The allegations have not been determined on their merits.
The summons was served in April 2019. The defendants sought particulars in June 2019, but replies were not provided until October 2021, a gap of about 28 months. Further replies to rejoinders took another six months.
The defendants themselves then delayed for about 15 months before delivering their defence in July 2023. The court accepted that this delay was unjustified. Graham subsequently sought further particulars and voluntary discovery in March 2024, but by May 2025 had taken no further step to advance the case.
Mr Justice Barrett said the central issue was the cumulative effect of delay on the fairness of a future trial. The case concerned events in a residential care setting and would depend significantly on staff recollections of what happened. Almost ten years after the alleged assault, those memories would inevitably have deteriorated.
Applying the Supreme Court’s 2025 decision in Kirwan v Connors, the judge found that Graham’s earlier delays were more significant than the defendants’ later delay and were the predominant cause of the prejudice.
The court said striking out proceedings was a measure of last resort but concluded that no lesser case-management step could now restore the prospect of a fair trial. The claim was therefore struck out.