Judgment: 2025-03-21 · Court archive

High Court sends Sutton planning time-limit dispute to EU court

High Court · [2025] IEHC 161

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Shahla Thompson (Applicant)
What

High Court sends Sutton planning time-limit dispute to EU court

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Howth Road, Sutton, Dublin 13
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Thompsons ultimately came to court on August 23, one day after the eight-week period calculated from the decision date had expired. The High Court found that their principal difficulty was their mistaken belief that time ran from notification rather than from the decision itself. They had nevertheless lost several days because of the board's delayed notification.

The High Court has asked the Court of Justice of the European Union to rule on Irish planning-law time limits in a dispute over permission for an infill home on Howth Road, Sutton, Dublin 13.

Alex and Shahla Thompson are challenging An Bord Pleanála's June 2023 decision granting permission for a single-storey dwelling to the rear of an existing site, together with parking, boundary changes and utility connections.

The board made its formal decision on June 28, 2023. Under Irish planning law, the eight-week period for seeking judicial review began that day. However, the applicants were not notified by post until July 4 and the decision file was not published online until July 5, later than the statutory three-day publication requirement.

The Thompsons ultimately came to court on August 23, one day after the eight-week period calculated from the decision date had expired. The High Court found that their principal difficulty was their mistaken belief that time ran from notification rather than from the decision itself. They had nevertheless lost several days because of the board's delayed notification.

Mr Justice Humphreys has now referred three questions of EU law to Luxembourg before deciding whether their challenge can proceed.

The first asks whether EU environmental law and the right to an effective remedy require either fixed notification deadlines or, where notification timing is discretionary, that the judicial review clock begin only when notice is received.

The second asks whether applicants must receive a compensating extension where an authority breaches a notification deadline and thereby shortens the period available to challenge a decision.

The third asks whether EU law prevents Ireland from withholding such an extension merely because the applicants still had enough time, after receiving notice, to commence proceedings within the original deadline.

The ruling does not decide whether the Sutton permission is valid or whether the Thompsons are entitled to extra time. Those questions remain stayed until the CJEU gives its preliminary ruling.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review