The High Court has granted Thomas Reid partial leave to seek judicial review of An Bord Pleanála’s 2020 permission for modifications to Intel Ireland Limited’s manufacturing facility near Leixlip, County Kildare. The ruling allows selected grounds to proceed to a substantive hearing; it does not quash the permission or decide the remaining claims on their merits.
Justice Humphreys delivered the judgment on 9 December 2022. The challenge concerns a permission granted on 12 November 2020 for changes to previously approved development, including alterations to roof-mounted service ducting, access platforms for two flue stacks and replacement of gas cylinders with a removable gas trailer.
Reid argued, among other things, that the Board had not properly assessed potential effects on European sites, failed to address a remedial obligation arising from defects in an earlier assessment, and did not notify him or the public of its decision. Intel’s facility is near the Rye Water Valley/Carton Special Area of Conservation, which includes protected habitat and species.
The court refused leave on claims that the Board lacked sufficient information to assess effects on European sites, failed to make complete findings, or did not properly screen for appropriate assessment. The judge said the alleged information gaps had not been established to the required level, including through evidence that a reasonable expert would have recognised a flaw in the material before the Board.
Leave was granted on a narrower claim that the Board’s order and direction did not record an appropriate assessment screening or findings. The judge noted that a related legal issue was under appellate or European consideration and said the parties could address at a later stage whether the point should be heard separately. Leave was also granted on the claim that the Board had a remedial obligation to address alleged defects in an earlier assessment; the judge considered that legal issue too complex to resolve at the leave stage.
On environmental impact assessment, leave was granted on the argument concerning industrial estate development thresholds, but refused on the claim that the project qualified as urban development. Claims about notification of Reid and the public were allowed to proceed only for declaratory relief, not to seek certiorari on those grounds. A separate challenge to the validity of a regulation was granted leave, with that issue to await the outcome of the rest of the case. A claim concerning the Seveso Directive was not pursued.
The court ordered Reid to file a further amended statement of grounds within one week during term and serve a substantive notice of motion within the following week. The claim against the State was adjourned to a later module, and the costs of the leave hearing were left for consideration on the return date.