Quarry owner’s appeal denied as retrospective application of directives upheld

High Court refuses a limestone quarry owner's application for leave to appeal against two decisions by the Planning Appeals Board, which dismissed the quarry's application for substitute consent and refused planning permission for further development. The court found that the quarry encompassed areas developed beyond any pre-1964 use, rendering arguments about the quarry being a pre-1964 development irrelevant. The court also reiterated that the law regarding the application of the Environmental Impact Assessment and Habitats Directives to ongoing developments is well-established and not uncertain, dismissing the applicant's hypothetical questions as not arising from the facts of the case. The court emphasised that the legislature is entitled, and indeed obliged under EU law, to regulate and remediate ongoing and past works' effects, and that compliance with these regulations does not impose retrospective criminal sanctions.