The High Court has quashed An Bord Pleanála’s permission for a proposed wind farm at Mountdillon, County Longford, ruling that the application did not provide the plans and particulars required by planning regulations.
Mr Justice Humphreys made the order of certiorari on 16 June 2021. The case concerned a proposed wind farm of up to 24 turbines, with a maximum tip height of 185 metres, on industrially drained bogland. The development also included a substation and grid connection.
The applicant, Peter Sweetman, argued that the application left key design choices open until after planning permission. The turbine model was to be selected through a tender process, while the application gave maximum dimensions and typical designs rather than final specifications. The judge noted that foundation design, hardstand arrangements and some siting details were also subject to later determination.
The court held that the planning regulations required plans and particulars describing the development. A broad design envelope, open to substantial variation up to stated maximums, did not meet that requirement. Assessing environmental effects against a “worst case” scenario did not cure the lack of sufficiently specific project details, the judgment said, because environmental assessment and particulars of the project applied for are different matters.
The board had argued that a planning condition required final turbine details to be agreed with the planning authority within the application’s permitted range. The judge said that did not answer whether the application itself contained the required plans and particulars. He also rejected reliance on previous cases involving design envelopes, finding that they had not determined this specific issue under the relevant application requirements.
The judgment records that a first inspector had recommended refusal, citing effects on the landscape setting of the Corlea Trackway Visitor Centre and the climate impacts of continued pumping. A later inspector considered further information and recommended that the board could proceed with its deliberations. The board granted permission in June 2020, concluding that continuous pumping of the entire site was not required throughout construction and operation.
The court’s decision was confined to the domestic planning regulations. It said the applicant’s environmental impact assessment and appropriate assessment grounds did not need to be considered once the design-detail ground succeeded. The judgment therefore made no determination of those separate EU law challenges. The order quashing the permission did not itself grant or refuse permission for a revised application.