Courts / Cork / Report

Supreme Court to hear Cork flood relief works case

Summary

The Supreme Court has agreed to directly hear an appeal by the Save Cork City Community Association CLG (SCCCA) against the High Court's refusal to overturn An Bord Pleanála's permission for flood relief works in Cork city. Last year, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys found that the SCCCA had not made out grounds for an order quashing the permission granted to Cork City Council for the works. He also ruled that the group is not entitled to a stay on the works being carried out. In his judgement, the judge found that the group was entitled to a declaration that the council did not comply with public participation obligations under the planning acts to ensure members of the public could inspect or purchase a Natura Impact Statement concerning the works. The group applied to the Supreme Court for a direct or 'leapfrog' hearing of its appeal against the High Court's decision. It also claimed that the case raises an important issue concerning Environmental Impact Assessment screening. In a determination, a Supreme Court panel comprised of Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne, Mr Justice Seamus Woulfe and Mr Justice Gerard Hogan said that exceptional circumstances of public importance exist in this case which required the appeal to be determined by the court. In its action, the group challenged the board's decision of June 17, 2020 to grand permission for remedial works to the existing quay walls in Cork city and construction of improvement works and flood defence works between Parliament Bridge and Parnell Bridge along Morrison's Quay and Fr Matthew Quay, and a short section along Union Quay close to Trinity footbridge at Morrison's Island. The group alleges the permission involved impermissible "project splitting" within the meaning of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Directive of the Lower Lee Flood Relief Scheme (LLFRS), the overall flood relief scheme for the city. Its concern was that part of a project for the purposes of the directive may now be given consent without the project as a whole being made subject to an EIA. The case was taken against the Board, the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the State. In its decision granting a leapfrog appeal, the Supreme Court accepted that the group had raised a point of general, public importance that requires a determination by it. The issue raised relates to whether the power to conduct an EIA screening can be implied in the relevant section of the 2000 Planning and Development Act, particularly where it is said that there is no provision for such a procedure when an EIA report is required. The group argues that the High Court decision has profound implications for legal certainty in local authority development, not least because the relevant law does not specify what should happen if Environmental Impact Assessment is required. The Supreme Court said it would not hear arguments in relation to the second point raised by the group, as to whether the High Court applied an incorrect test of "practical interpretation" to the concept of project splitting under the EIA Directive. That point had been dealt with in another case ruled on by the Supreme Court, the three-judge panel determined. The Supreme Court will fix a date for the hearing of the appeal at a later stage.

Who, what, where, when and why

What: Report matter: Supreme Court to hear Cork flood relief works case. Procedural stage: hearing_or_decision

When:

• June 17, 2020 Hearing Or Sentence
• 2022-05-05 Publication

Why: The group argues that the High Court decision has profound implications for legal certainty in local authority development, not least because the relevant law does not specify what should happen if Environmental Impact Assessment is required. CNI source report

Case subjects

Places mentioned

Topics

Stage Hearing Or Decision

Related court reports

• ESB worker too late to pursue claim seeking €42k in alleged unpaid overtime
• Seamstress treated 'shabbily' after 17 years at Cork shop wins €76k
• Pub ordered to pay €10k for 'humiliating' remark about barman by company boss
• Former accountant went on 'nationwide tour' with bank card stolen from hospital patient
• Car salesman sacked over 'around the corner deal' wins €10k
• Salesman who alleged 'corruption' and 'crazy' discount in Saudi deal loses penalisation case

Read the original CNI report