The High Court has refused two applicants permission to appeal their unsuccessful challenge to planning approval for a telecoms mast in County Leitrim.
In a judgment delivered on 1 April 2026, Mr Justice Humphreys rejected an application by Noel McGowan and Karol Warnock for leave to appeal the court’s earlier decision upholding permission granted to Vantage Towers Limited.
The proposed development is a single telecoms mast outside the development boundary of a small rural settlement. The applicants argued, among other things, that an appellate court should consider whether telecoms masts can fall within the EU Environmental Impact Assessment Directive category of “urban development”.
The High Court held that the proposed questions mischaracterised its earlier judgment. The judge said he had not treated the legal meaning of urban development as a matter of unrestricted discretion or rejected the requirement for uniform interpretation of EU law.
He also held that, whatever uncertainty might hypothetically exist around the boundaries of the term, there was no plausible interpretation under which this particular rural mast could constitute urban development. Treating it that way could significantly expand environmental impact assessment requirements to rural projects not listed in the directive.
A separate proposed appeal point concerned planning guidance relating to the proximity of telecoms infrastructure to a school. The court held that this issue had not been pleaded in the necessary way and therefore could not form the basis of an appeal.
Mr Justice Humphreys also found no demonstrated uncertainty in EU law requiring a reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union. No contrary court decision or other substantial authority had been identified.
The judge concluded that another appeal would undermine finality in planning litigation and risk delaying telecoms infrastructure without sufficient legal basis.
Leave to appeal was dismissed. Unless the Supreme Court grants a separate leapfrog appeal, there will be no order for the costs of this leave application.