The Applicants brought three Applications to dismiss three separate Actions for long delay.

The Respondent argued that the delay occurred because it was too dangerous to proceed to Questioning, as the police had advised that a criminal gang intended to murder the Plaintiff and anyone in the vicinity of the Plaintiff was in danger. The Court held that this did not constitute a Standstill Agreement. Additionally the Court held that other steps could have been taken or precautions could have been implemented to allow Questioning to take place. Two of the Actions were dismissed.

In the third Action, there was not a 5 year gap. The Plaintiff served an Affidavit of Records during the 5 year period. The Respondent argued that the Affidavit of Records was a blank record (there were no records listed), and thus it was not a completed step.

The Court held that the Rules specifically allow for this situation (Rule 5.6 (3)), and the Application was dismissed. The Court also Ordered that the Plaintiff would have to obtain leave of the Court before filing a further and better Affidavit of Records.