The High Court has ordered that Michael McCoy bear his own costs in his environmental planning case over quarrying at Ballinascorney Upper, Brittas, Co Dublin, subject to statutory exceptions. The order does not decide whether the quarrying is unauthorised or whether it requires planning permission.
Ms Justice Baker made the order on 16 July 2014 under section 3 of the Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011. The judgment concerns a costs-protection application in proceedings brought under section 160 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The substantive case was progressing towards trial, with affidavits served and an oral hearing considered likely.
McCoy, a resident of adjoining land and described in the judgment as a full-time student of limited means, alleges that quarrying by Shillelagh Quarries Limited on land owned by the other respondents is unauthorised. He argued that the activity’s scale and character had changed since before planning controls took effect in 1964. South Dublin County Council had joined him as a co-applicant.
The respondents disputed that account. They said quarrying began before October 1964 and had not materially intensified, so planning permission was not required. They also denied the alleged environmental effects. The judge noted earlier planning-related decisions and litigation that supported McCoy’s case sufficiently to give it a reasonable prospect of success, but stressed that she was not deciding the substantive dispute.
The court accepted that the proceedings raised environmental questions of public interest, including claims about effects on landscape, water and air quality. Those effects remained contested. The judge also rejected the arguments that the costs application was premature or outside the statutory scheme, and found that McCoy’s evidence about his limited means and the likely high costs was sufficient in this case.
The order means McCoy must bear his own costs and generally protects him from an adverse costs award. It does not guarantee that he can recover costs if he succeeds. The judge said the trial court retains statutory discretion to award costs in specified circumstances, including where a claim is frivolous or vexatious, because of how a party conducts the case, or where exceptional public importance and the interests of justice warrant an award. The judgment did not determine the final planning or environmental issues.