The plaintiffs brought a motion for a status hearing under Rule 48.14(5) to show cause why their action, initiated in 2011 for copyright infringement, should not be dismissed for delay.
The court examined the plaintiffs' explanation for the 5.5-year delay, which included extensive settlement discussions and a change of counsel, and the defendants' claim of non-compensable prejudice.
The Master found that the plaintiffs provided an acceptable explanation for most of the delay, with any minor unexplained period partly attributable to the defendants' own inaction.
Furthermore, the defendants failed to demonstrate non-compensable prejudice resulting from the plaintiffs' delay.
Consequently, the motion was granted, the action was allowed to proceed, and a timetable for setting the action down for trial by September 30, 2018, was ordered.
Case management was deemed unwarranted at that time.
