The High Court has ordered Martin Gavin and the other defendants to leave land they were occupying and remove their property, but stayed the orders for three months to allow further discussions about accommodation and safety.
Mr Justice Michael Peart said the application by Dublin City Council was limited to ending the defendants’ trespass. It did not ask the court to require them to return to St. Dominick’s Park.
In an earlier judgment on 19 December 2008, the court found that the defendants were trespassing. It deferred removal orders because the council had accepted there was then no suitable alternative site available. The council later said it had cleared and cleaned St. Dominick’s Park, put essential services in place and installed CCTV cameras, making it suitable as a temporary unserviced site.
The defendants argued that returning would put them at serious risk because of past intimidation and violence involving the McDonagh families, who occupy an adjacent site. An affidavit from Sergeant Charles McConologue of Santry Garda Station supported their safety concerns. He said cameras or a wall would not preserve the peace for long and feared a serious, possibly fatal incident. The council did not file an affidavit contradicting that evidence.
The judge described the defendants’ concerns as genuine and said the CCTV installation was a minimalist response that gave him no comfort they would feel reasonably safe if they returned. He also said An Garda Síochána was responsible for investigating incidents and threats, but was not obliged to provide round-the-clock protection to the families.
The council maintained that St. Dominick’s Park was the only site it could offer and that it had met its accommodation obligations, including adopting a Traveller Accommodation Programme for the next three years. The defendants’ side submitted that other sites could be considered; the council said resources prevented it from purchasing other land.
Despite the safety concerns, the judge said the council was entitled to the orders because the site was physically capable of occupation. He stayed the orders for three months, urging meaningful discussions about the families’ future accommodation and safety, including whether another location might become available. He warned that insisting on St. Dominick’s Park as the sole option could lead to the defendants occupying other land and facing similar proceedings from another landowner.