The High Court has dismissed a motion by Pat Lynch and Denise Leavy to strike out Glenveagh Homes’ claim over planning submissions and appeals affecting the developer’s projects. The case will proceed to trial, where the disputed facts and legal issues remain to be determined.
In a judgment delivered on 15 April 2024, Mr Justice Humphreys said the defendants had not shown that the claim was a strategic lawsuit against public participation, or otherwise an abuse of process, at this preliminary stage. He also found that they had not established there was no reasonable prospect of evidence supporting Glenveagh’s case.
Glenveagh alleges that submissions and appeals made under the names “Denis Leavy”, “DM Leavy” and “D Leavy” were made by or on behalf of the defendants to pressure it during negotiations to buy land in the Clonmagadden Strategic Development Zone, near Navan. The company claims the names were fictional or contrived and that the planning activity was used to seek more advantageous financial terms. Those are allegations, not findings by the court.
The judgment records that the defendants made planning submissions and appeals between March 2021 and January 2023. Glenveagh says negotiations over land purchases took place during that period, including discussions in which it alleges the submissions could be made to “go away”. The defendants dispute the claim and argued that the proceedings could deter public participation in planning decisions. They also relied on protections under the Aarhus Convention.
The judge said the case raised substantial factual and legal questions, including whether the alleged conduct occurred and whether the Convention provides a defence. He considered those issues unsuitable for decision on a strike-out motion without full argument and findings of fact. He said the action was not manifestly unfounded, while making clear that neither the defendants’ factual account nor their legal arguments had been rejected.
Glenveagh had narrowed its requested relief before the motion was decided. The court allowed most of the proposed amendments, including changes to the requested injunction, but a proposed declaration was not pressed. The judge dismissed the strike-out motion without prejudice to the defendants raising their defences, including an argument at trial that the claim is abusive or legally unfounded.
The company was given two weeks to deliver an amended statement of claim. Unless a party sought a different costs order within 14 days, the defendants would receive no order for their motion costs, while Glenveagh’s costs were reserved. The matter was listed for mention on 29 April 2024.