The High Court has struck out proceedings brought by engineer John V. Lennon over a planning application to retain a canopy at The Locke Bar and Restaurant on George’s Quay, Limerick City.
In a judgment delivered on 3 April 2006, Miss Justice Laffoy held that Lennon had no standing to seek a declaration about the application made by Richard Costello. She also ruled that the planning authority’s decision to return the application as invalid could not be challenged through the special summons Lennon had brought.
Limerick City Council issued an enforcement notice on 23 July 2004 requiring the canopy to be removed. After the notice was not complied with, Domanska Limited was fined €500 and ordered to pay €400 in costs and €150 in expenses by the District Court on 18 March 2005. The court also directed that the specified works be carried out. An appeal to the Circuit Court was pending at the time of the High Court judgment.
Lennon, acting as engineer for Costello, submitted an application for retention permission on 31 August 2004. The council returned it on 24 September, listing seven deficiencies and treating it as invalid. Lennon disputed that assessment. He sought a declaration that Costello had made a valid application, arguing in an affidavit that the council’s failure to decide it lawfully within the required time meant permission was deemed to have been granted on 27 October 2004. That was his assertion, not a finding by the High Court.
The council applied to strike out the proceedings, arguing that Lennon had no interest in the property and lacked standing, and that any challenge to the council’s decision had to be brought by judicial review within the statutory time limit. Laffoy J accepted both grounds. Lennon had no estate or interest in the property, and the application had been made by Costello, not Lennon. The judge concluded that Lennon could not seek the declaration concerning a third party’s application.
The judge also found that section 50 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 required a challenge to the planning authority’s decision to be brought by judicial review, subject to an eight-week time limit. Because Lennon’s proceedings were brought by special summons, they could not be used to challenge that decision.
The court ordered the proceedings struck out. It did not determine whether the council was right that the application was invalid, whether Costello was entitled to retention permission, or the pending appeal from the District Court’s enforcement decision.