The High Court has allowed David Malone to add a proposed restoration report order to his enforcement case concerning the former Ballinderry quarry, while leaving the underlying claims unresolved.
In a judgment delivered on 9 July 2025, Mr Justice Conleth Bradley permitted an amendment to Malone’s originating notice of motion. The proposed relief would require GCHL Limited to prepare and submit, within one month, a report on restoring the site to its original state before the alleged unauthorised developments. It would include details of removal work and be verified by an independent environmental expert.
The judge stressed that allowing the amendment did not assess the strength of the proposed relief. GCHL and Kildare County Council had not yet filed replying affidavits and would have an opportunity to respond. Any eventual restoration or removal order would depend on findings in the substantive case, including whether unauthorised activity is established.
Malone’s case seeks enforcement relief under planning and waste legislation concerning the quarry in Carbury, County Kildare. The judgment says GCHL operated the worked-out sand and gravel pit and that a waste licence application for its proposed restoration, reference W0298-01, remained pending before the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The court refused Malone’s request to join the Attorney General as a notice party. It also refused his request for an order directing the EPA to decide the licence application within one month. The judge said that relief was, in substance, an application for mandamus against a public authority and was not appropriate within this statutory enforcement case. The EPA had previously been removed from the substantive application after an earlier judgment rejected a request to prevent it from processing the licence application. The judge expressed no view on the merits of a separate application against the EPA.
A request to require replying affidavits within 21 days was also refused. The judge said GCHL had previously been excused from filing affidavits until the motions then before the court were determined. Further affidavit directions may be addressed at a later directions hearing.
The court adjourned consideration of Malone’s requested EU-law declarations, damages and a preliminary reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union, so the parties could consider a related High Court judgment. The case was listed for mention on 22 July 2025.