Redmond & Anor v Commissioner for Environmental Information & Anor (Approved) [2020] IECA 83 (03 April 2020)

Redmond & Anor v Commissioner for Environmental Information & Anor (Approved) [2020] IECA 83 (03 April 2020)

The Court held that the Commissioner erred in law by focusing on whether the information sought was intrinsically environmental rather than on whether the sale of the Coillte lands was a measure likely to affect the environment. The correct test is whether there is a real and substantial possibility that the sale would affect the environment. The Court found that the sale of over 400 hectares of forestry and woodland by a public authority was, in the circumstances, a measure likely to affect the environment, and information relating to the sale constituted 'environmental information' under the AIE Regulations.

Citation
[2020] IECA 83
Parties
Appellant/applicant: Jim Redmond; Appellant/applicant: Mary Redmond; Respondent: Commissioner for Environmental Information; Notice Party: Coillte Teoranta
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
03 April 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Access to Environmental Information, Definition of Environmental Information, Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions, Public Authority Obligations, Interpretation of EU Directives
Administrative Law Environmental Law Freedom of Information Access to Environmental Information Definition of Environmental Information Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions Public Authority Obligations Interpretation of EU Directives

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jim Redmond

Appellant/applicant

Mary Redmond

Appellant/applicant

Commissioner for Environmental Information

Respondent

Coillte Teoranta

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether information relating to the sale of Coillte's leasehold interest in land constitutes 'environmental information' under the AIE Regulations
  2. 2 Whether the sale of land by a public authority is a 'measure' likely to affect the environment under Article 3(1)(c) of the AIE Regulations
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner for Environmental Information erred in refusing access to information sought by the appellants

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the Commissioner erred in law by focusing on whether the information sought was intrinsically environmental rather than on whether the sale of the Coillte lands was a measure likely to affect the environment. The correct test is whether there is a real and substantial possibility that the sale would affect the environment. The Court found that the sale of over 400 hectares of forestry and woodland by a public authority was, in the circumstances, a measure likely to affect the environment, and information relating to the sale constituted 'environmental information' under the AIE Regulations.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The decision of the Commissioner for Environmental Information is quashed.
  • The matter is remitted to the Commissioner for reconsideration in accordance with law.