The High Court has joined An Taisce – The National Trust for Ireland and Save Our Bride Otters as amici curiae in proceedings brought by the Hellfire Massy Residents Association. The organisations may make written submissions on proposed answers to questions the court intends to refer to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).
In a judgment delivered on 14 December 2021, Mr Justice Humphreys gave reasons for an order made on 1 December. He also ordered that the case title be amended to use the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage’s current official title.
The proceedings had already resulted in an earlier judgment in which the High Court dismissed the association’s case on some points and decided in principle to refer certain questions to the CJEU. A later judgment refused leave to appeal in relation to the dismissed matters. This latest decision concerned only the proposed participation of the two organisations and the steps to finalise the EU reference.
The judge said both proposed amici met the mandatory requirements for appointment and that the balance of relevant factors favoured joining them. He noted the public law dimension of the case, An Taisce’s statutory role and expertise, and the potential for the organisations to offer perspectives distinct from those of the parties. He also said Save Our Bride Otters’ members were involved in proceedings raising an identical point, which could be affected by a CJEU judgment in this case.
The judge acknowledged that the proposed amici were domestic organisations, so an additional cross-jurisdictional perspective was not a factor. He also recorded that the State respondents had reservations but did not press their objection vigorously; the board was neutral, and South Dublin County Council did not take a position.
Under the existing directions, each amicus must bear its own costs, is not liable for another party’s costs, and will participate by written submissions in the Irish proceedings. The order gave the organisations two weeks from 1 December to send submissions to the court, copied to the parties, on their proposed answers to the questions identified in the earlier judgment.
After that period, and having regard to any submissions filed by the amici, the judge said he would finalise the order for reference. The judgment did not itself determine the questions for the CJEU or set out the final reference order.