The High Court quashed Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council’s January 2019 permission for a housing development in Brennanstown after the council conceded that its decision did not adequately record its reasons for excluding an environmental impact assessment at the preliminary examination stage.
Mr Justice David Barniville’s judgment, delivered on 20 December 2019, concerned Orla Fitzgerald’s judicial review of permission granted to Tudor Homes Limited for a development at Lehaunstown Lane, within the Cherrywood Strategic Development Zone. The proposal was reduced from 367 to 364 homes during the planning process.
The council agreed to an order quashing its decision on the limited ground that it had failed adequately to record the reasons for its conclusions under Article 103 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001. The court made that finding on the basis of the council’s concession. It did not determine Fitzgerald’s other grounds, which included challenges concerning reasons, the treatment of her property boundary, and environmental and habitats assessment. The judge said those grounds were not decided and were not barred from being raised in any fresh proceedings, subject to the required leave.
The court also remitted the planning application to the council. It directed that reconsideration begin immediately before the council’s planning application assessment, after receipt of the further information and later submissions, observations and reports. The court further proposed an order deeming the relevant decision period to expire two weeks after the orders were perfected.
The judgment says the council may reach the same or a different decision, provided it acts in accordance with law. The remittal did not amount to approval of the development or predetermine the council’s decision. The judge did not decide whether the council would owe the developer statutory delay payments.
The judgment set out proposed orders, including costs for Fitzgerald against the council, with amounts to be adjudicated if not agreed. It said the precise terms of the orders would be discussed with counsel after they had considered the judgment. The source therefore records proposed orders at that stage, rather than confirming the final perfected order.