High Court Clarifies Law On Dismissal Of Cases For Delay

• Published date: 05 December 2025
• Law Firm: William Fry
• Author: Garrett Breen, Laura Murdock and Joanne Ryan

The Supreme Court's landmark decision in Kirwan v Connors [2025] IESC 21 (Kirwan) reformulated how the Irish courts deal with applications to dismiss proceedings for want of prosecution and/or delay.

Two recent High Court judgments, Murphy v Aer Lingus Group plc & Anor [2025] IEHC 589 (Murphy) and Doyle v Commissioner of An Garda Síoch'na & Ors [2025] IEHC 591 (Doyle), provide helpful guidance and clarification on the application of the Kirwan test in practice.

The Reformulated Test

Before Kirwan, the test for dismissal for want of prosecution was governed by Primor plc v Stokes Kennedy Crowley [1996] 2 IR 459, which focused on whether the delay was inordinate, inexcusable and whether the balance of justice favoured dismissal. In Kirwan, the Supreme Court shifted the focus to the passage of time and introduced a new four-tier test based on defined periods of inactivity. See our previous article here for further information.

Murphy v Aer Lingus Group plc & Anor [2025] IEHC 589

In Murphy, the High Court (Court) granted the defendants' application to dismiss the plaintiff's claim for want of prosecution. The proceedings, which commenced over 12 years previously, concerned a claim by the plaintiff that, in the course of her employment as cabin crew, she sustained injuries when an aircraft "landed heavily" on a flight from Dublin to Birmingham.

Persistent delays occurred throughout the case, with the plaintiff failing to progress proceedings at multiple stages despite reminders from the defendants. In August 2024, the defendants issued a motion to dismiss the claim for want of...