The High Court refused Poundland Limited’s application to quash An Bord Pleanála’s decision on the planning status of its retail unit at Fonthill Retail Park, Dublin. Mr Justice Cian Ferriter found no breach of fair procedures because Poundland knew about the referral but did not seek to participate.
The judgment, delivered on 3 October 2022, concerned the Board’s June 2018 decision that using Unit 3 as a discount store selling small-scale convenience goods was development and was not exempted development. The referral had been brought by the property owner, PKB Partnership. Poundland occupied the unit under a lease and was not a party to that referral.
Poundland argued that the Board should have invited it to make submissions because the decision addressed the unit’s use and could adversely affect the retailer. It also argued that it had no way to ask to join the process. The Board said Poundland knew of the referral, had worked with PKB on the planning issues, and had chosen not to take part.
The judge rejected the claim that Poundland had no route into the process. He said it could have made submissions under section 130 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, or asked the Board to accept submissions using its discretionary power under section 131. If a third party requested permission and said its interests could be affected, the Board had to consider that request; it was not required to seek out Poundland when it had not asked to participate.
The judgment noted that a submission made for Poundland in a separate retention-permission process showed it knew about PKB’s referral and its basis. The judge did not accept the Board’s separate argument that Poundland had materially failed to disclose that knowledge to the court.
The judge did not decide whether the Board’s referral decision would bind Poundland in later enforcement proceedings. Nor did he need to decide whether Poundland had sufficiently identified the submissions it would have made.
The challenge was technically moot because, in a separate case heard with this one, the court had decided that PKB was entitled to an order quashing the Board’s decision and sending the referral back for fresh consideration. The judge said Poundland could apply to make submissions in that fresh process, with the Board to decide how to deal with any application. He refused the relief Poundland sought.