The High Court has awarded Brownfield Restoration Ireland Limited costs against Wicklow County Council for work connected with the Whitestown dump remediation, including costs arising from the council’s abandoned bid to pursue further risk assessment. The court did not make a finding of contempt. It dismissed most of Brownfield’s contempt motion, while adjourning specified reliefs for further submissions about the remediation deadline.
In a judgment delivered on 8 May 2024, Mr Justice Humphreys said an order made in July 2017 required full remediation within 78 months. That deadline had passed, and no waste had been removed. He found that the council’s further investigation approach was inconsistent with an earlier judgment rejecting delay for more data gathering. The council’s motion seeking approval of detailed quantitative risk assessment tools was not pursued and was adjourned generally in July 2020.
The judge said the delay could not be explained by a 2020 letter from Brownfield requesting adherence to the EPA code, because the council had failed to operationalise the remediation order during the preceding years. He awarded Brownfield the costs of the abandoned methodology motion and costs for reviews of compliance with the remediation order. The judgment also awards costs connected with the independent assessor process, except for the costs of cross-examining witnesses for an earlier proposed candidate, for which there was no order as to costs. The court set out a default award of 80% of the costs of the costs issues, subject to a party applying otherwise within 14 days.
The court approved the terms and duties for an independent assessor and ordered that Ove Arup & Partners Ireland Limited, trading as Arup, be appointed, subject to its acceptance of those terms. The assessor is to advise on the remaining remediation plan and the time needed for full remediation; decisions remain with the court.
Brownfield’s motion sought contempt-related remedies over non-compliance with the 2017 order. The court noted that the order, with a penal endorsement, was served after the compliance deadline. It said prior service was at least desirable for contempt proceedings, particularly for a mandatory order. The judge therefore dismissed the contempt-related reliefs not otherwise dealt with, while adjourning reliefs concerning the Chief Executive’s attendance, a replacement remediation timetable, compliance with an approved plan and further directions. The judgment said this did not endorse the non-compliance.
The parties were directed to make submissions on whether and how to extend the long-stop date. The separate 2020 proceedings were adjourned generally with liberty to re-enter. The judgment listed the matter for mention on 10 June 2024 to address next remediation steps, the assessor’s advice and the deadline.