Although the statutory period of one year had lapsed since the last action in the suit, the court found that dismissal for want of prosecution is not automatic upon the expiry of this period. The court must consider the surrounding circumstances, including the backlog of cases, the fact that directions had not been taken, and that the defendants had not filed their defence. The lapse of one year and four months, while technically sufficient, was not deemed excessive or indicative of abandonment of the suit. The court exercised its discretion to refuse dismissal, finding it would be harsh to the plaintiff, and instead directed the matter be listed for directions. However, the defendants were awarded costs of the application as they were entitled to bring it after the statutory period had lapsed.