Molloy & Ors v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform & Ors [2004] IEHC 74 (30 April 2004)

Molloy & Ors v. Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform & Ors [2004] IEHC 74 (30 April 2004)

A valid planning permission for use as a residential hostel granted in 1969 for Broc House was not abandoned or lost by subsequent unauthorised religious use; the permission remains extant and capable of implementation. No new planning permission is required to revert to hostel use from an unauthorised intervening use. Only a significant intensification of use may require new permission, but that is not established on the facts.

Citation
[2004] IEHC 74
Parties
Applicants: Brendan Molloy, Pauline Walley, Marguerite Phelan, Brian Kavanagh, Marion Dee, Breda McCormack, Edward Dempsey, Maura Gleeson, Desmond Magahy, David Farrell, Eileen Clarke and Thomas Cunniam; Respondents: The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, The Minister for Finance, Ireland and The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
30 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
Planning Permission, Change of Use, Material Change of Use, Abandonment of Planning Permission, Enurement of Planning Permission, Intensification of Use, Exempted Development
Planning Law Administrative Law Planning Permission Change of Use Material Change of Use Abandonment of Planning Permission Enurement of Planning Permission Intensification of Use +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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brendan Molloy, Pauline Walley, Marguerite Phelan, Brian Kavanagh, Marion Dee, Breda McCormack, Edward Dempsey, Maura Gleeson, Desmond Magahy, David Farrell, Eileen Clarke and Thomas Cunniam

Applicants

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, The Minister for Finance, Ireland and The Attorney General

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1969 planning permission for Broc House as a residential hostel was abandoned or spent by subsequent unauthorised religious use
  2. 2 Whether the proposed use as a reception centre for asylum seekers constitutes a material change of use requiring new planning permission
  3. 3 Whether intensification of use would require planning permission

Ratio Decidendi

A valid planning permission for use as a residential hostel granted in 1969 for Broc House was not abandoned or lost by subsequent unauthorised religious use; the permission remains extant and capable of implementation. No new planning permission is required to revert to hostel use from an unauthorised intervening use. Only a significant intensification of use may require new permission, but that is not established on the facts.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • All reliefs sought by the applicants are refused