High Court, in planning and development judicial review proceedings, quashes planning board's decision on appeal to grant planning permission for the development of an anaerobic digester plant, on the grounds, inter alia, that the board's conclusions in relation to a European Directive on major accident hazards were unsupported by the material put before it in respect of the likelihood of the limit for biogas at the proposed site being exceeded.
Judicial review - planning and development - decision to grant planning permission for development of anaerobic digester plant - applicant with special needs hold planning permission for construction of dwelling for specific purposes on lands in proximity to proposed plant site - board's inspector's recommendation to refuse planning permission - steps taken on remitted planning appeal - screening assessment's adequacy - grounds of challenge - environmental impact assessment determination - nature of board's determination on issue - whether proposed development involves a 'chemical process' - applicant's failure to discharge onus of proof of prescribed class or category of proposed development - COMA regulation - whether board erred in its conclusions that there was no likelihood of limit for biogas being exceeded at plant - material before board - fair and reasonable reading of pleadings - whether screening assessment contains multiple material errors of fact - curial deference - no material before board justifying its conclusions - insufficient information given to board to assess waste tonnage - conditions on grant of permission do not require developer to demonstrate compliance with outcome - recommended condition not actually attached - error of fact compromises an error of law - board failed to circulate BOC report - whether planning application misstated separation distance - no evidence board erred in its understanding of separation distances - certiorari granted.