The High Court has dismissed an application by Dublin City Council and the Minister for Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht to strike out a judicial review brought by the Sandymount and Merrion Residents Association over an enlargement of Dublin’s sewage works.
Mr Justice Charleton ruled that the residents’ group could continue the environmental case despite being an unincorporated association without legal personality. The ruling addressed only whether the review could proceed; it did not decide the group’s challenge to the planning permission.
An Bord Pleanála granted planning permission for the works on 16 November 2012, subject to conditions. The project includes a nine-kilometre pipeline to discharge treated effluent into Dublin Bay. The association claims the pipeline would affect a special area of conservation. The Minister designated an area including the outfall pipe as a candidate special area of conservation on 3 December 2012.
The association obtained leave to bring judicial review proceedings on 18 January 2013 and an ex parte injunction stopping Dublin City Council from proceeding with the works. The judgment says that interim injunction no longer continued. The council and Minister sought dismissal on two grounds: alleged failure to disclose in the association’s affidavit that work had begun, and the group’s lack of capacity to sue.
The judge rejected the disclosure argument, calling its grounds “exceptionally weak”. The council relied on photographs of drilling equipment and evidence that preliminary works were under way. It also said the injunction had cost it €50,000 in payments to contractors. The judge said such activity would not necessarily alert residents that work on the sewage plant extension had begun. He noted that association members had declared they knew nothing of the work.
On capacity, the court distinguished the association’s standing from its legal ability to bring the case. It said the group had sufficient interest under section 50A of the Planning and Development Act 2000. Charleton J interpreted the environmental provisions as permitting an organisation pursuing environmental protection for at least 12 months to continue, where no ministerial regulations excluded unincorporated associations. He said the decision did not apply to planning matters outside environmental decision-making.
The court dismissed the application to strike out the review on both grounds. The substantive challenge to the planning permission remains to be determined.