Application for attachment and committal refused where no ongoing breach is established on the part of company

Application for attachment and committal – two directors disobeyed previous court orders - company is operating its waste facility in breach of the terms of an order made by this court pursuant to the planning legislation - contempt motion has been brought in the context of enforcement proceedings taken pursuant to section 160 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 - principal judgment held that the planning permission does not authorise the treatment, by shredding, of timber at the waste facility - no discussion in the principal judgment of the definition of “packaging waste” – court order – principles governing civil contempt – procedural requirements – application for attachment and committal - evidence from the site inspection - nature of ongoing breaches alleged – timber shredding - compliance had been achieved by the date of the hearing of the contempt motion - other alleged breaches of the court order - no direct or first-hand knowledge of the skip movements - applicants have failed to establish, to the criminal standard of proof, that non-compliant waste is regularly received and accepted at the waste facility - propriety of seeking relief against directors -no evidence has been adduced in respect of the nature and extent of the operations of the company - doubtful whether it would be appropriate to make orders against the directors of the company – no ongoing breach established on the part of the company - cannot be said that, on an objective interpretation, the Court Order would be clearly understood as prohibiting the receipt of wooden pallets sourced from a construction site - respondent company had been in breach of the spirit of, if not necessarily the letter of, the Court Order by continuing to shred timber at the waste facility – application refused.