The High Court has directed that an application to challenge two extensions of a wind farm planning permission be heard on notice to the respondents and notice parties. It did not decide whether the extensions were lawful or grant leave for judicial review.
Martin Collins sought leave to challenge Galway County Council decisions dated 5 September 2007 and 1 November 2010, which extended the life of planning permission for a 48-turbine wind energy project at Keelderry, Peterswell, County Galway. The permission, granted by An Bord Pleanála in 2002, was extended first to 4 September 2011 and then to 3 September 2014. The project was promoted and was to be developed by notice parties An Bord Gáis and Keelderry Wind Farm Limited.
Collins acknowledged that he was apparently outside the eight-week time limit for seeking leave. He asked the court for an extension of time and leave to apply for judicial review, along with legal aid and protection from adverse costs. The judge noted that Collins’s filed papers did not include a draft statement of grounds and did not comply with the relevant court rules.
Justice John Edwards said Ireland and the Attorney General should be notified of the legal aid claim. He adjourned that part of the application until the relevant parties were put on notice, noting that the court had doubts about its jurisdiction to order State-funded legal representation and would require persuasion.
The judge also refused to let Collins proceed ex parte with his extension-of-time request and application for leave. He said the issues were complex and could affect the respondents and notice parties. In deciding whether there was good and sufficient reason to extend time, the court would need to consider matters including delay, prejudice and the merits of the proposed review. The judge said those merits could not justly be assessed without hearing from the other parties.
The judgment referred to an earlier High Court decision, *Coll v Donegal County Council*, which appeared adverse to Collins’s case. Collins argued that it could be distinguished, including because the lands in that case were not a Special Protection Area or Special Area of Conservation. Justice Edwards said the issue required full argument and that the other parties were entitled to respond; he made no finding on the merits.
The court directed Collins to notify the respondents and notice parties by letter, enclosing specified papers, the judgment and the resulting order. He was also directed to file by 13 January 2011 a short supplemental affidavit exhibiting a draft statement of grounds. The matter was adjourned to the judicial review list on that date, before the judge assigned to it.