Doyle and Ors v An Coimisiun Pleanala and Ors [No. 3] (Approved) [2026] IEHC 156 (13 March 2026)

Doyle and Ors v An Coimisiun Pleanala and Ors [No. 3] (Approved) [2026] IEHC 156 (13 March 2026)

The planning permission was quashed because the Board failed to identify, consider, and assess the potential impacts of the proposed development on bat fauna for the purposes of EIA, as conceded by the Board and confirmed by the Inspector's factual error regarding the presence of a bat roost. This constituted a legal error in the EIA process, requiring the decision to be set aside.

Citation
[2026] IEHC 156
Parties
Applicants: Colin Doyle, Friends of the Irish Environment CLG, Futureproof Clare, Martin Knox and Christine Sharp; Respondents: An Coimisiún Pleanála, The Government of Ireland, Ireland and the Attorney General; Notice Party: Art Data Centres Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
13 March 2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Modular Hearings
Outcome
Permission quashed
Legal Topics
Climate Action, Environmental Impact Assessment, Planning Permission, Strategic Infrastructure, EU Directives, Biodiversity, Judicial Review Procedure
Planning and Environmental Law Administrative Law EU Law Climate Action Environmental Impact Assessment Planning Permission Strategic Infrastructure EU Directives +2 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Doyle, Friends of the Irish Environment CLG, Futureproof Clare, Martin Knox and Christine Sharp

Applicants

An Coimisiún Pleanála, The Government of Ireland, Ireland and the Attorney General

Respondents

Art Data Centres Limited

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment After Modular Hearings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the planning permission for the data centre and substation was invalid due to failure to consider climate obligations under domestic law
  2. 2 Whether the Board failed to adequately assess environmental impacts on bat fauna for EIA purposes
  3. 3 Whether the Government Statement on Data Centres required SEA assessment under EU law

Ratio Decidendi

The planning permission was quashed because the Board failed to identify, consider, and assess the potential impacts of the proposed development on bat fauna for the purposes of EIA, as conceded by the Board and confirmed by the Inspector's factual error regarding the presence of a bat roost. This constituted a legal error in the EIA process, requiring the decision to be set aside.

Court Disposition

Permission quashed

Orders

  • Order of certiorari quashing the Board's decisions of 5 April 2024 granting planning permission for the data centre and substation developments
  • Declaration that the Board failed to properly assess environmental impacts on bat fauna for EIA purposes