O'Connell v. Environmental Protection Agency [2001] IEHC 102; [2002] 1 ILRM 1 (5th July, 2001)

O'Connell v. Environmental Protection Agency [2001] IEHC 102; [2002] 1 ILRM 1 (5th July, 2001)

Collette O’Connell’s application for Judicial Review was made within the statutory two-month period and was not unreasonably delayed given the circumstances, including the need for legal and expert advice and the distraction caused by alleged breaches of planning permission by Dungarvan Energy Limited. There was no material non-disclosure or misrepresentation by Collette O’Connell. Dungarvan Energy Limited is entitled to an undertaking as to damages but not a fortified undertaking.

Citation
[2002] 1 ILRM 1
Parties
Applicant/notice Party: Dungarvan Energy Limited; Respondent/applicant in Judicial Review: Collette O’Connell; Respondent in Judicial Review: Environmental Protection Agency
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Procedural Posture
Application to Strike Out Judicial Review Proceedings / High Court Judgment on Application to Strike Out
Outcome
Application to strike out Judicial Review proceedings refused; undertaking as to damages required but not fortified.
Legal Topics
Judicial Review, Locus Standi, Statutory Time Limits, Promptness in Judicial Review, Undertaking as to Damages, Material Non Disclosure
Administrative Law Environmental Law Planning Law Judicial Review Locus Standi Statutory Time Limits Promptness in Judicial Review Undertaking as to Damages +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 5 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dungarvan Energy Limited

Applicant/notice Party

Collette O’Connell

Respondent/applicant in Judicial Review

Environmental Protection Agency

Respondent in Judicial Review

Procedural Posture

Application to Strike Out Judicial Review Proceedings / High Court Judgment on Application to Strike Out

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Dungarvan Energy Limited has locus standi to bring the application to strike out
  2. 2 Whether the Judicial Review proceedings are statute barred under Section 85(8) of the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1992
  3. 3 Whether the application for Judicial Review was made 'promptly' as required by Order 84 Rule 21(1) of the Rules of the Superior Courts, 1986

Ratio Decidendi

Collette O’Connell’s application for Judicial Review was made within the statutory two-month period and was not unreasonably delayed given the circumstances, including the need for legal and expert advice and the distraction caused by alleged breaches of planning permission by Dungarvan Energy Limited. There was no material non-disclosure or misrepresentation by Collette O’Connell. Dungarvan Energy Limited is entitled to an undertaking as to damages but not a fortified undertaking.

Court Disposition

Application to strike out Judicial Review proceedings refused; undertaking as to damages required but not fortified.

Orders

  • Collette O’Connell to give an undertaking to pay damages to Dungarvan Energy Limited for any provable loss and damage sustained as a consequence of the stay, should she not succeed in her challenge.
  • Application for a fortified undertaking as to damages refused.