The High Court granted a limited stay pending appeal in a judicial review concerning permission for 698 student bedspaces at Our Lady’s Grove, Goatstown Road, Dublin 14. The stay applies to the order made following an earlier judgment on 14 January 2022. It lasts 10 days from perfection of that order and, if the applicants file a notice of appeal within those 10 days, continues until the appeal’s first return date.
Mr Justice David Holland said the applicants had shown arguable grounds to appeal his earlier decision, which had varied an existing stay to let developer Colbeam Limited carry out specified enabling works. He did not decide the appeal or make a final ruling on the judicial review. The judgment addressed only whether the order should be stayed pending appeal.
The judge’s decision turned in significant part on events after his earlier ruling. Colbeam had felled some trees on the site. The court had correspondence and counsel’s submissions about that work, but the judge said he had not read four affidavits subsequently filed by the applicants and had not relied on them. The applicants were concerned that removing trees could make some grounds of their judicial review moot.
The permission required agreements with the planning authority before development began. Colbeam’s counsel did not confirm that the required written agreements were in place. The judge inferred that, without a stay, Colbeam would probably resume work before completing those agreements. He said development in those circumstances would be unauthorised under the permission’s terms. He did not determine the criminal law status of any particular work or exercise an enforcement jurisdiction.
The judge weighed that prospect against Colbeam’s concern about financial losses from delay and the public interest in allowing development under a permission that remained in force. He concluded that the prospect of unauthorised development reduced the weight of that public interest and tilted the balance towards a stay. He also accepted that proceeding with the works could make some judicial review grounds moot.
The stay is limited to the appeal’s first return date, rather than lasting through the full appeal. The judgment said that if Colbeam later demonstrates full compliance with the pre-commencement conditions, an application to lift or vary a stay may arise. Costs of the stay application were adjourned to be considered with other outstanding costs issues.