Protect Kenilworth Square and Anor v Dublin City Council and Ors (Approved) [2026] IEHC 93 (18 February 2026)

Protect Kenilworth Square and Anor v Dublin City Council and Ors (Approved) [2026] IEHC 93 (18 February 2026)

The proposed works fall within the definition of exempted development under Class 33(c) of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as the statutory definitions of 'development' and 'works' include the activities proposed, and there are no relevant limitations in the regulations. The exemption only requires that no charge is made for admission of the public to the land, which is satisfied. The works do not constitute 'urban development' or an 'infrastructure project' requiring Environmental Impact Assessment. The Council's Section 5 declaration was intra vires and lawful.

Citation
[2026] IEHC 93
Parties
Applicant: Protect Kenilworth Square; Applicant: Martin Joyce; Respondent: Dublin City Council; Notice Party: The Congregation of the Holy Spirit; Notice Party: The Board of Management of Saint Mary's College
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
18 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Exempted Development, Environmental Impact Assessment, Statutory Interpretation, Protected Structures
Planning Law Environmental Law Administrative Law Exempted Development Environmental Impact Assessment Statutory Interpretation Protected Structures

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Protect Kenilworth Square

Applicant

Martin Joyce

Applicant

Dublin City Council

Respondent

The Congregation of the Holy Spirit

Notice Party

The Board of Management of Saint Mary's College

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed works fall within the exempted development provisions of Class 33(c), Schedule 2, Part 1 of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001
  2. 2 Whether the Council's Section 5 declaration was intra vires and lawful
  3. 3 Whether the proposed works constitute 'urban development' or an 'infrastructure project' requiring Environmental Impact Assessment under the EIA Directive

Ratio Decidendi

The proposed works fall within the definition of exempted development under Class 33(c) of the Planning and Development Regulations 2001, as the statutory definitions of 'development' and 'works' include the activities proposed, and there are no relevant limitations in the regulations. The exemption only requires that no charge is made for admission of the public to the land, which is satisfied. The works do not constitute 'urban development' or an 'infrastructure project' requiring Environmental Impact Assessment. The Council's Section 5 declaration was intra vires and lawful.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application for judicial review is dismissed.
  • Court will hear the parties as to the final order to be made.