The High Court has refused Noel Murphy leave to seek judicial review of An Bord Pleanála’s permission for a gas turbine power station in Kilshane, Dublin, finding that he did not have sufficient interest to bring the case.
Ms Justice Emily Farrell delivered judgment on 4 March 2025. The proposed development includes demolition, road improvements and associated site works. The Board granted permission on 16 May 2024, subject to 24 conditions. The court’s decision concerned whether Murphy could proceed with his challenge; it did not determine the substantive validity of the Board’s permission.
Murphy lives in Straffan, Co Kildare. He accepted that he was not directly affected by the development and had not participated in the planning process. He gave no explanation for not taking part. His proposed grounds included claims about the Fingal County Development Plan and the Board’s consideration of environmental impact and protected European sites at Malahide Estuary. One ground was withdrawn at the leave hearing.
The judge said proximity can be relevant to standing where it indicates a possible effect on a person’s interests, but found that Murphy did not live close to the development or the protected sites and had shown no personal connection with them or established environmental interest. She also noted that members of the public, public bodies and groups had participated in the planning process, and that the public had been invited to participate on four occasions.
The court rejected the argument that EU environmental law required the national standing rules to be widened to allow Murphy’s case to proceed. It found that the rules could take account of his non-participation and did not have to be set aside. The judge concluded that raising environmental grounds alone did not establish sufficient interest.
The judgment also addressed the first proposed ground, although the court said it did not need to decide whether the grounds met the threshold for leave after finding that Murphy lacked standing. That ground alleged that Fingal County Council had failed to allow submissions on the 2023 County Development Plan and had applied the earlier plan. The judge held that a declaration that the Council’s process breached fair procedures would, in substance, question the validity of its planning decision, and could not be separated from that decision under the statutory judicial review rules.
The order refused leave to apply for judicial review. The court did not quash or otherwise alter the planning permission.