Doyle & Ors v An Bord Pleanala & Ors [No.2] (Approved) [2025] IEHC 205 (11 April 2025)

Doyle & Ors v An Bord Pleanala & Ors [No.2] (Approved) [2025] IEHC 205 (11 April 2025)

Applicants are not entitled to have their costs reserved for issues on which they lost in a modularised trial; making no order as to costs for losing points does not breach the Aarhus Convention or fairness principles. The provisional order stands: no order as to applicants' costs for Module I, and the developer's costs are reserved.

Citation
[2025] IEHC 205
Parties
Applicant: Colin Doyle; Applicant: Friends of the Irish Environment CLG; Applicant: Futureproof Clare; Applicant: Martin Knox; Applicant: Christine Sharp; Respondent: An Bord Pleanála; Respondent: The Government of Ireland; Respondent: Ireland; Respondent: The Attorney General; Notice Party: Art Data Centres Limited
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
11 April 2025
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Post Substantive Judgment, Costs Determination
Outcome
Provisional order as to costs stands; no order as to applicants' costs for Module I; developer's costs reserved; no order as to applicants' costs of the application to vary the provisional order; developer's costs of that application reserved.
Legal Topics
Costs in Environmental Litigation, Aarhus Convention Compliance, Modular Trials, Judicial Review Procedure, Set Off of Costs
Planning and Environment Law Administrative Law Environmental Law Costs in Environmental Litigation Aarhus Convention Compliance Modular Trials Judicial Review Procedure Set Off of Costs

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Doyle

Applicant

Friends of the Irish Environment CLG

Applicant

Futureproof Clare

Applicant

Martin Knox

Applicant

Christine Sharp

Applicant

An Bord Pleanála

Respondent

The Government of Ireland

Respondent

Ireland

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

Art Data Centres Limited

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Post Substantive Judgment, Costs Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether applicants are entitled to have their costs reserved after losing on modularised issues
  2. 2 Whether making no order as to costs for losing applicants breaches the Aarhus Convention
  3. 3 Whether modularisation affects costs entitlement

Ratio Decidendi

Applicants are not entitled to have their costs reserved for issues on which they lost in a modularised trial; making no order as to costs for losing points does not breach the Aarhus Convention or fairness principles. The provisional order stands: no order as to applicants' costs for Module I, and the developer's costs are reserved.

Court Disposition

Provisional order as to costs stands; no order as to applicants' costs for Module I; developer's costs reserved; no order as to applicants' costs of the application to vary the provisional order; developer's costs of that application reserved.

Orders

  • No order as to applicants' costs for Module I.
  • Developer's costs reserved, including for the application to vary the provisional order and listing dates of 31st March 2025 and 7th April 2025.