The defendants appealed an interlocutory order dismissing their motion to dismiss the plaintiff's action for delay.
The action, arising from alleged dog attacks in 1996 and 1997, had been delayed for 11 years since the events.
The Divisional Court found that the plaintiff failed to provide an explanation for the delay and failed to rebut the presumption of prejudice.
The appeal was allowed and the plaintiff's action was dismissed for delay.
