Judgment: 2026-07-17 · Court archive

High Court partially quashes Passage West greenway approval as remittal issues remain

High Court, Planning & Environment · [2026] IEHC 487

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Marcia D'Alton
  • Mella Leonard
  • Norma Lombard
  • An Coimisiún Pleanála
  • Cork County Council
  • Mr Justice Richard Humphreys
What

High Court partially quashes Passage West greenway approval as remittal issues remain

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 26 June 2026

    The case was brought by Marcia D'Alton, Mella Leonard and Norma Lombard against An Coimisiún Pleanála, with Cork County Council as notice party. In an earlier judgment on 26 June 2026, the court found grounds to interfere with part of the Commission's July 2025 approval for upgrading an existing two-kilometre route in Ardmore and Pembroke.

  • 21 September 2026

    The Commission was asked to clarify its intended procedure, with responses from the other parties to follow. The case was listed for further directions on 21 September 2026.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The case was brought by Marcia D'Alton, Mella Leonard and Norma Lombard against An Coimisiún Pleanála, with Cork County Council as notice party. In an earlier judgment on 26 June 2026, the court found grounds to interfere with part of the Commission's July 2025 approval for upgrading an existing two-kilometre route in Ardmore and Pembroke.

By Daniel Keane

The High Court has partially quashed approval for works on a pedestrian and cycle route at Passage West, County Cork, while leaving final decisions on how the affected section should return to the planning process for a later hearing.

The case was brought by Marcia D'Alton, Mella Leonard and Norma Lombard against An Coimisiún Pleanála, with Cork County Council as notice party. In an earlier judgment on 26 June 2026, the court found grounds to interfere with part of the Commission's July 2025 approval for upgrading an existing two-kilometre route in Ardmore and Pembroke.

Following further submissions, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys made an order on 9 July preserving specified features. The court quashed permission for demolition between chainages 1610 and 1780, meaning the existing wall and stile are to remain, and quashed widening between chainages 1660 and 1740 so that the car park remains.

The next issue is remittal, meaning sending the affected part of the planning decision back to the Commission for reconsideration rather than requiring an entirely new application. The judge held that the statutory remittal power can apply even where only part of a planning decision has been quashed.

However, the court has not yet made the final remittal order. A remaining question concerns the original inspector's report: specifically, whether it would form part of the new remitted file or otherwise be taken into account. Depending on the answer, the court said further relief or directions might be needed.

The Commission was asked to clarify its intended procedure, with responses from the other parties to follow. The case was listed for further directions on 21 September 2026.

The judgment therefore settles which physical elements of the approval are quashed, but not the final procedural route by which the affected section will be reconsidered.

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