The High Court has refused Thomas Reid’s application to reopen a judicial review he lost over planning permission for an Intel development, while allowing him to add a further environmental impact assessment ground to a separate, ongoing case.
In a judgment delivered on 28 March 2023, Mr Justice Humphreys dealt with applications across three judicial reviews concerning An Bord Pleanála decisions. Reid’s farm is beside Intel’s campus in County Kildare, according to the judgment.
The reopening application concerned the 2020 proceedings, which challenged a 2019 planning permission. Reid argued that the board had acted unlawfully when two members decided not to hold an oral hearing, where the legislation ordinarily required a quorum of three unless a valid exception applied. The board’s minutes, provided to Reid in October 2020, showed the decision had been made by two members.
The judge found no evidence that the board knew of the quorum problem before the earlier case was concluded. The issue came to light around July 2022, after a media inquiry. But the judgment held that Reid had enough information from the minutes and legislation to raise the point during the earlier proceedings. The court said the later discovery did not meet the exceptional threshold for reopening a final order. Reid’s motion to reopen was dismissed.
In the 2021 proceedings, which challenge a 2020 permission modifying earlier permissions, Reid sought to add a ground alleging that EIA screening was required and had not been properly conducted. The judge allowed the amendment, finding it was a modest extension of an issue already pleaded, was arguable for the purposes of the application, and would not cause irremediable prejudice. The amendment’s merits remain for the full hearing. The court refused Reid leave to appeal from the earlier leave judgment. Costs of the amendment application were reserved, and there was no order as to costs of the leave-to-appeal application, subject to further submissions.
The court also refused leave to seek judicial review in Reid’s 2022 proceedings, which challenged the earlier oral-hearing decision and planning permission. The judge said that challenge cut across the final order in the 2020 case and should have been pursued by seeking to reopen that case. He also found the point had been available from October 2020 and the later application was too late. The order was subject to a seven-day period for submissions on costs before being perfected.