High Court, in a 'telescoped' application for leave to seek judicial review of decision by planning board to grant planning approval for a large-scale energy infrastructure project, refuses application brought by lay litigant, on the grounds that: (a) no excuse or explanation was proffered by the application for bringing such an application after a significant delay; and (b) the application represents a collateral attack on a national energy development plan which has already been the subject of legal challenge in this jurisdiction.
Judicial review - telescoped application for leave to apply for judicial review - decision of planning board to grant planning permission for proposed energy interconnector infrastructure development - deficiencies in pleadings - applicant lay litigant - delay in bringing application - caselaw on issue of delay - no explanation or excuse for significant delay - application is a collateral attack on national energy development plan - alleged breaches of European Directive - allegation that proceedings before planning board were a pro forma exercise is unfounded - evidence before court - national implementation programme - strategic environmental assessment was fully considered - planning report - consent process was fully informed - public and landowner consultation report evidences no dearth of information - consultation process was meaningful and effective - environmental impact statement - legal principles to be applied - burden and standard of proof - caselaw submitted - consultation process was informed and considered - application refused.