The High Court has refused John Hogan leave to seek judicial review of planning permission for a garden enclosure and flower-growing polytunnel at Dinglei Coush, Bundoran, County Donegal.
In a judgment delivered on 21 November 2023, Mr Justice Conleth Bradley found that Donegal County Council’s April 2021 decision could not be challenged because Hogan had appealed it to An Bord Pleanála, which issued its own decision in November 2021. Under the planning legislation, the Board’s decision annulled the council’s decision.
The Board granted retention permission for the change of use of a tennis court to a garden enclosure and for the polytunnel, subject to four conditions. These included a restriction against commercial or retail use, and requirements for agreed boundary treatment and surface-water arrangements.
Hogan did not bring his application to court within the statutory eight-week period after the Board’s decision. He sought an extension, citing visual spatial dyslexia, anxiety and depression, personal and family difficulties, grief, and his lack of awareness that filing papers in the High Court office did not stop time running; the application had to be moved in court. The judge acknowledged the difficulties described, but found they did not amount to good and sufficient reason for an extension and were not circumstances outside Hogan’s control. His papers were filed in March 2022, but he moved his application in court on 7 November 2022.
The judge also considered whether Hogan’s grounds would meet the threshold of substantial grounds if time had been extended. Hogan argued, among other things, that the Board’s decision was irrational, that an environmental impact assessment was required, and that the development harmed residential amenity. The judge found that the Board’s decision and its adoption of the inspector’s report could not be considered irrational or unreasonable on the material before it. He concluded that Hogan had not established substantial grounds.
The court refused leave to challenge both the council and Board decisions. It did not determine any later compliance dispute about the permission; the judgment noted that statutory enforcement processes were available to planning authorities and citizens if needed. When the matter returned to court on 19 December 2023, Hogan said he did not wish to appeal. The court made no order as to costs.