No Results Found

The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.

Register Now
Friday, 24th October, 2025

Reference to EU court over legality of environmental information access charges under recent Aarhus Convention developments

By: Decisis
The High Court considered an appeal by an environmental group against a decision upholding a €15 charge for providing access to environmental information by a statutory forestry company. The appellant argued that the charge was unlawful, both under EU law following the Moldova decision via the Aarhus Convention Compliance Committee, and under the principle of equivalence with Irish freedom of information law. The court determined that both the Moldova ground and the equivalence ground raised significant questions of EU law that warranted a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). The judge ordered that two key questions be referred to the CJEU for guidance on whether such charges are permissible in light of recent international developments and the comparative domestic legal regime for access to information. All other preliminary objections relating to admissibility of grounds and entitlement to relief were either not pressed or resolved in favour of the appellant, with costs reserved.

Multiple actions against lender and receiver dismissed as abuse of process and hopeless

By: Decisis
The High Court dismissed proceedings issued by the borrower against the lender, a receiver, and the entity to which a mortgaged property was ultimately sold, concluding that the borrower's claims—alleging overcharging, breach of consumer law, fraud, harassment, trespass, nuisance, and other torts—disclosed no reasonable cause of action and were bound to fail. The court found that the borrower had borrowed money, defaulted on repayments, and that the receiver was lawfully appointed and entitled to deal with the property in accordance with the mortgage. In addition, the borrower had taken no steps to prosecute the claim for over seven years, and there was no pressing exigency of justice requiring the case to proceed. Consequently, the High Court ordered the lifting of the lis pendens on the property, allowing the lender to exercise its security. The decision reflects an emphasis on both procedural efficiency and the need to prevent abusive litigation tactics.

Application for stay on costs orders refused as appellants fail to establish prejudice or arguable grounds for appeal

By: Decisis
The Court of Appeal refused an application by the defendants for a stay on the enforcement of costs orders arising from the dismissal of their appeal against three High Court orders. The court found no evidence to support the claim that execution of costs orders was imminent or prejudicial, particularly as adjudication of costs was likely to be protracted and any further Supreme Court appeal would be heard promptly. The court also held that the appellants failed to present any stateable or arguable grounds for appeal, relying instead on vague or misleading assertions and not addressing the reasons given in the judgment under appeal. As a result, the stay was refused and the respondents were awarded the costs of the current application.

The only subject matter index for all Irish judgments over the past thirteen years. Click here to request a subscription.

Register Now