Keen v Nominal Defendant

In Keen v Nominal Defendant, the plaintiff sought to bring a proceeding against the defendant for injuries sustained in a motor accident. The defendant raised a preliminary objection to the proceeding, asserting that the plaintiff had failed to comply with the statutory requirement of making a claim within six months of the accident. The issue before the court was whether the plaintiff had provided a full and satisfactory explanation for the delay in making the claim. The court considered the evidence and submissions provided by the parties before determining the matter.

The court examined the statutory provision governing the limitation period for claims arising from motor accidents, and noted that a plaintiff must provide a full and satisfactory explanation for any delay in making a claim. The court considered the plaintiff's evidence and submissions, and found that the plaintiff had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay. The court was satisfied that the delay was not attributable to any fault or neglect on the part of the plaintiff, and that there were no other factors that would render the claim unjust or inequitable. The court accordingly allowed the plaintiff's motion and dismissed the defendant's objection.

The court found that the plaintiff had provided a reasonable explanation for the delay in making the claim, and that the delay was not attributable to any fault or neglect on the part of the plaintiff. The court was satisfied that the delay did not prejudice the defendant's ability to defend the claim, and that there were no other factors that would render the claim unjust or inequitable. The court therefore allowed the plaintiff's motion and dismissed the defendant's objection.

The orders of the court were that the plaintiff's motion was allowed, and that the defendant's objection was dismissed. The court further ordered that the proceeding be listed for further mention to facilitate the progress of the matter. The court did not make any orders as to costs.