The defendant appealed an order of a Master setting aside a Registrar’s administrative dismissal of an action for delay under Rule 48.14 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.
The underlying action alleged a fraudulent conveyance of property by a judgment debtor to his spouse in order to defeat creditors.
The court reviewed the discretionary standard governing motions under Rule 37.14 and the contextual test for reinstating actions dismissed for delay, including considerations of explanation for delay, inadvertence, promptness of the motion, and prejudice.
The court held that a plaintiff is not required to provide extensive affirmative evidence of absence of prejudice where the defendant offers none and the surrounding circumstances indicate no non-compensable prejudice.
The appeal was dismissed and the Master’s order reinstating the action was upheld.
