Connelly -v- An Bord Pleanala & ors [2018] IESC 31 (17 July 2018)

Connelly -v- An Bord Pleanala & ors [2018] IESC 31 (17 July 2018)

The Supreme Court held that the requirement to give reasons in administrative decisions, including those involving EIA and AA, is satisfied if the reasons can be reasonably ascertained from the decision, the Inspector’s report, and other referenced documentation, provided these are accessible to interested parties. The Board’s approach, in this case, met the standard required by law, and the High Court erred in demanding a higher or more specific standard of reasoning. The Board was entitled to rely on the Inspector’s report and subsequent documentation, and its reasoning was sufficiently clear to allow for judicial review and for affected parties to understand the decision.

Citation
[2018] IESC 31
Parties
Applicant/respondent: Kathleen Connelly; Respondent/appellant: An Bord Pleanála; Notice Party: Clare County Council; Notice Party: McMahon Finn Wind Acquisitions Ltd
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
17 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Adequacy of Reasons in Administrative Decisions, Environmental Impact Assessment (eia), Appropriate Assessment (aa), Judicial Review Standards, Planning Permission Process, EU Habitats Directive Compliance
Administrative Law Planning and Environmental Law European Union Law Adequacy of Reasons in Administrative Decisions Environmental Impact Assessment (eia) Appropriate Assessment (aa) Judicial Review Standards Planning Permission Process +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kathleen Connelly

Applicant/respondent

An Bord Pleanála

Respondent/appellant

Clare County Council

Notice Party

McMahon Finn Wind Acquisitions Ltd

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether An Bord Pleanála provided adequate reasons for its decision to grant planning permission for a wind farm development, particularly in relation to EIA and AA requirements under national and EU law
  2. 2 Whether the Board complied with statutory obligations to record and communicate its reasoning, including scientific findings, as required by the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the Habitats Directive

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the requirement to give reasons in administrative decisions, including those involving EIA and AA, is satisfied if the reasons can be reasonably ascertained from the decision, the Inspector’s report, and other referenced documentation, provided these are accessible to interested parties. The Board’s approach, in this case, met the standard required by law, and the High Court erred in demanding a higher or more specific standard of reasoning. The Board was entitled to rely on the Inspector’s report and subsequent documentation, and its reasoning was sufficiently clear to allow for judicial review and for affected parties to understand the decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by An Bord Pleanála is dismissed.
  • The order of certiorari quashing the Board’s decision is reversed; the Board’s decision to grant planning permission stands.