Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court dismisses appeal from High Court, and affirms refusal to grant judicial review of the refusal of An Bord Pleanala to determine a question of whether peat extraction was 'exempted development' under the planning laws, where the owners of some of the relevant lands could not be identified, on the ground that: (a) the trial judge had not given undue 'curial deference' to the Board on the issue of notice to landowners, but had simply reached the same decision as the Board on the same issues; (b) in order to reach a determination on the issue of whether peat extraction was exempted development, it was necessary to put the landowners on notice; and (c) nothing in the relevant EU legislation obviated the requirement of notice to landowners.
Dunne J (nem diss): Planning and development - peat extraction - whether peat extraction works constituted 'exempted development' - whether Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) or Appropriate Assessment (AA) required - reference to planning authority under section 5 of Planning and Development Act 2000 - referral of matter to An Bord Pleanala (ABP) - additional information sought - attempts to identify owners of bogs - appeal dismissed by ABP on grounds of being unable to identify owners - whether ABP best placed to assess whether it had information necessary to make a determination and comply with fair procedures - relevant owners could not be heard on appeal - whether decision irrational or unreasonable - refusal to certify questions of law to Supreme Court - whether questions of general public importance - legislative framework - entitlement of parties to make submissions on section 5 application - entitlement of ABP to determine matter if submissions or observations were not received - discretion to dismiss - whether problem of identifying owners could have been resolved by affixing notice on the lands - curial deference - specialist skill and expertise of ABP - application of EIA directive - protection of peatlands - requirement to give notice to landowners.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
The only e-mail alert service for all Irish judgments over the past 13 years. Click here to request a subscription.
Register Now