The High Court has ordered a stay of an appeal to An Bord Pleanála concerning the entry of a Limerick property on the Vacant Sites Register, pending the determination of judicial review proceedings brought by Dunnes Stores (Limerick) Limited and Dunnes Stores Unlimited Company.
In a ruling on the stay motion, delivered on 18 January 2019, Ms Justice Ní Raifeartaigh said the court was not deciding the substantive judicial review or the merits of the appeal. The applicants had already received leave to bring the judicial review on the basis that there were “substantial grounds” to argue their case; the Council had not applied to set that leave aside.
The applicants seek to quash Limerick City and County Council’s decision to enter a site on Sarsfield Street on the register. They allege, among other things, that the decision was unlawful and made in bad faith because the Council had an interest in acquiring and redeveloping the property. These remain allegations, not findings in this ruling.
The first applicant appealed the Council’s decision to the Board in July 2018. The applicants argued that the appeal could not resolve the bad-faith allegation and that the second applicant had not been served with the relevant notices, leaving it unable to participate in the appeal. The Council opposed the stay, arguing that the Board’s appeal was the appropriate route to address the planning issues and could make the judicial review unnecessary.
The judge said the Board could not determine the bad-faith issue. She also interpreted the legislation as making the right of appeal dependent on service of notice. The second applicant had not been served, and the judge considered that this could prevent it from participating in the appeal. She noted uncertainty about whether that would affect the appeal’s outcome, but said that, if the applicants succeeded on this point, the appeal could not cure the alleged procedural defect.
The court saw no prejudice to the Council from allowing the judicial review to proceed first. The judge noted that, if the applicants ultimately lost, the vacant-site levy could be backdated, as she understood the legislation.
The order was to grant a stay of the motion appeal pending determination of the judicial review proceedings. The ruling did not quash the register entry, determine whether the property qualified as a vacant site, or resolve the allegations against the Council.