Callaghan -v- An Bord Pleanala [2018] IESC 39 (31 July 2018)

Callaghan -v- An Bord Pleanala [2018] IESC 39 (31 July 2018)

The Supreme Court held that the statutory scheme does not require or imply a right for third parties to be heard at the pre-application SID designation stage. The Board's opinion under s.37A(2) is a procedural decision that does not materially or practically affect third party rights in the sense required to trigger constitutional fair procedures. All relevant matters, including whether a development is strategic infrastructure, remain open for consideration at the substantive planning application stage, where public participation is provided. The process is compatible with constitutional and EU law.

Citation
[2018] IESC 39
Parties
Applicant/appellant: John Callaghan; Respondent: An Bord Pleanála; Respondents: Ireland and the Attorney General; Notice Parties/respondents: Element Power Ireland Limited, Element Power Ireland and North Meath Wind Farm
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
31 July 2018
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Strategic Infrastructure Development, Right to Be Heard, Judicial Review, Public Participation, Environmental Impact Assessment, Statutory Interpretation
Planning Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Constitutional Law Strategic Infrastructure Development Right to Be Heard Judicial Review Public Participation +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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Callaghan

Applicant/appellant

An Bord Pleanála

Respondent

Ireland and the Attorney General

Respondents

Element Power Ireland Limited, Element Power Ireland and North Meath Wind Farm

Notice Parties/respondents

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a third party objector is entitled to be heard prior to An Bord Pleanála forming an opinion that a proposed development is a Strategic Infrastructure Development (SID) under s.37A of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended)
  2. 2 Whether the statutory scheme requires or implies a right to be heard at the pre-application SID designation stage
  3. 3 Whether the absence of such a right is compatible with constitutional fair procedures and EU law

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the statutory scheme does not require or imply a right for third parties to be heard at the pre-application SID designation stage. The Board's opinion under s.37A(2) is a procedural decision that does not materially or practically affect third party rights in the sense required to trigger constitutional fair procedures. All relevant matters, including whether a development is strategic infrastructure, remain open for consideration at the substantive planning application stage, where public participation is provided. The process is compatible with constitutional and EU law.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed. No entitlement for third parties to be heard at the pre-application SID designation stage.