Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Challenger to wind farm could seek judicial review despite no participation in the planning process
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court, on appeal from the High Court, determines: a) that one of two challengers to a wind farm development had the necessary standing to pursue the proceedings, on the grounds that she lived sufficiently close to the development, notwithstanding that she had not participated in the planning process; and b) that a resolution of the substantive issue required certain questions of European law to be referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Clarke J and O'Malley J (joint judgment, nem diss): Environmental law - planning and development - wind farms - s.50 of the Planning and Development Act, 2000 - judicial review - refusal of certificate to appeal decision of High Court - leapfrog appeal to Supreme Court (bypassing Court of Appeal) - issues of standing in environmental matters - whether jurisprudence of Supreme Court required to be revised in light of judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Union - absence of entitlement to appeal - whether substantive appeal should be allowed - appeals precluded in the absence of a certificate - jurisdiction of Court of Appeal - point of law of exceptional public importance - desirable in the public interest that appeal be pursued - standing - Article 11 of the Codified Directive 2011/92/EU - Aarhus Convention - challenge to environmental legislation - entitlement to object to planning permission - limits on standing in judicial review challenges - whether limits on standing required to be reviewed in light of Article 11 - O.84, r.20(4), RSC - Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2011 (s. 20) - sufficient interest - standing of persons who had not participated in planning process - whether prior participation was in all cases a prerequisite to standing - express statutory requirement of prior participation - European dimension - requirement of broad access to justice - standing of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) - application of traditional Irish standing rules to applicants in instant case - specific interest of challengers in relevant development - reference of questions to CJEU.
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.
