On which two grounds must the court or judge receiving an application to challenge dismiss it, and in what form?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file, we read the application to challenge to see when and how it was made, the court's written ruling on it, and the earlier filings whose timing might bear on the purpose of the application.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading takes the verb as mandatory: where the application plainly aims to delay the proceedings, or where it breaches the conditions the preceding provision sets for making a challenge, the court or judge receiving it shall dismiss it by a ruling, with no option to let it stand.
Another reading stresses the word 'plainly', which the provision attaches only to the delay purpose: the delay must be evident, and the provision's only other ground is a failure to follow the preceding article on where and how a challenge must be filed, so an application in proper form and not plainly dilatory is not dismissed under this paragraph even if it later fails on the merits.
Your judgment
What in the file could show that the delay purpose was evident rather than merely asserted by the receiving court or judge?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the mandatory wording or add a ground, or if a court decision explains what makes a delay purpose 'plain' or what a breach of the preceding provision consists of.