Clancy & Anor v An Bord Pleanala & Ors (No.2) (Approved) [2023] IEHC 464 (28 July 2023)

Clancy & Anor v An Bord Pleanala & Ors (No.2) (Approved) [2023] IEHC 464 (28 July 2023)

Costs protection under s. 50B of the Planning and Development Act 2000 does not apply to the CPO process or ancillary challenges except insofar as the extinguishment of rights of way under the CPO may arguably constitute a 'project' for purposes of the Habitats Directive, warranting a costs-protected hearing on that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2023] IEHC 464
Parties
Applicant: John Clancy; Applicant: Sheena Clancy; Respondent: An Bord Pleanála; Respondent: Clare County Council; Respondent: Ireland; Respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
28 July 2023
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Costs Protection Application Following Substantive Challenge to Compulsory Purchase Order
Outcome
Relief refused except in relation to the issue arising from extinguishment of rights of way; costs protection hearing ordered on that issue.
Legal Topics
Compulsory Purchase Order, Costs Protection, Environmental Impact Assessment, Habitats Directive, Rights of Way, Development Consent, Constitutional Rights, Ultra Vires, Policy Challenge
Administrative Law Planning Law Constitutional Law Environmental Law European Union Law Compulsory Purchase Order Costs Protection Environmental Impact Assessment +6 more

Source-derived case record

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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Clancy

Applicant

Sheena Clancy

Applicant

An Bord Pleanála

Respondent

Clare County Council

Respondent

Ireland

Respondent

The Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Costs Protection Application Following Substantive Challenge to Compulsory Purchase Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether costs protection applies to a challenge against a compulsory purchase order under s. 50B of the Planning and Development Act 2000
  2. 2 Whether extinguishment of rights of way under a CPO constitutes a 'project' for purposes of the Habitats Directive
  3. 3 Whether the CPO process is legislation giving effect to EU environmental law

Ratio Decidendi

Costs protection under s. 50B of the Planning and Development Act 2000 does not apply to the CPO process or ancillary challenges except insofar as the extinguishment of rights of way under the CPO may arguably constitute a 'project' for purposes of the Habitats Directive, warranting a costs-protected hearing on that issue.

Court Disposition

Relief refused except in relation to the issue arising from extinguishment of rights of way; costs protection hearing ordered on that issue.

Orders

  • Relief sought in the notice of motion as against the board and the State refused other than in relation to the issue arising from rights of way extinguishment.
  • Matter to be listed for mention to fix a date for a costs protection hearing against all opposing parties on the rights of way issue, which will be costs-protected.