Judgment: 2024-05-31 · Court archive

High Court refuses Morris’s challenge to Howth apartment permission

The court rejected the applicant’s additional grounds for judicial review of permission for a 32-unit development, with costs and final orders left for a later hearing.

High Court · [2024] IEHC 328

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Christian Morris (Applicant)
  • An Bord Pleanála (Respondent)
What

The court rejected the applicant’s additional grounds for judicial review of permission for a 32-unit development, with costs and final orders left for a later hearing.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Dungriffin Road, Howth, County Dublin
  • Howth
  • County Dublin
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 21 October 2022

    An Bord Pleanála granted permission on 21 October 2022 for demolition of an existing building and construction of the apartment block. Morris argued that the Board had overlooked a statutory restriction on new buildings near existing or permitted structures. The court found that this ground did not identify the buildings or explain a legal error. It held that a general allegation of insufficient curiosity or diligence could not justify judicial review relief.

  • 19 June 2024

    The court refused all relief sought in Morris’s amended statement of grounds. It did not make final orders at this stage: the parties were given two weeks to file written submissions on costs and ancillary matters, and the case was listed for a remote mention on 19 June 2024 to make final orders.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

An Bord Pleanála granted permission on 21 October 2022 for demolition of an existing building and construction of the apartment block. Morris argued that the Board had overlooked a statutory restriction on new buildings near existing or permitted structures. The court found that this ground did not identify the buildings or explain a legal error. It held that a general allegation of insufficient curiosity or diligence could not justify judicial review relief.

The High Court has refused Christian Morris’s application to overturn planning permission for a 32-unit apartment development at Dungriffin Road, Howth, County Dublin. The judgment dealt only with additional grounds Morris raised in his judicial review; the court had addressed grounds shared with a separate challenge in a companion judgment.

An Bord Pleanála granted permission on 21 October 2022 for demolition of an existing building and construction of the apartment block. Morris argued that the Board had overlooked a statutory restriction on new buildings near existing or permitted structures. The court found that this ground did not identify the buildings or explain a legal error. It held that a general allegation of insufficient curiosity or diligence could not justify judicial review relief.

Morris also challenged the proposed waste disposal arrangements, citing the development’s density, the cramped site and narrow, hilly roads. The Board objected that he had not raised the issue during the planning process and therefore should not raise it for the first time in court. The judge acknowledged that objection but decided to consider the point given that Morris was representing himself. Having reviewed the Inspector’s report, relevant documents and condition 15 of the permission, the court concluded that waste disposal had received adequate consideration.

The court rejected Morris’s other grounds as too general or unintelligible to establish legal error. They concerned the development’s departure from nearby buildings, the Board’s approach to alleged “injury”, and unspecified “ever evolving extenuating circumstances”. The judge said disagreement with the Board about the development’s character was not itself a legal error.

The court refused all relief sought in Morris’s amended statement of grounds. It did not make final orders at this stage: the parties were given two weeks to file written submissions on costs and ancillary matters, and the case was listed for a remote mention on 19 June 2024 to make final orders.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review