An attempt by some local residents to prevent Broc House, in Nutley Lane, Dublin 4, being used as an accommodation centre for asylum-seekers was rejected by the High Court yesterday.
The 12 residents had objected to a change of use from premises of a religious body to a reception or accommodation centre.
In a reserved judgment, Mr Justice Gilligan noted that in 1969 planning permission was granted to the Franciscan Fathers for the erection of a three-storey residential hostel block at the location. Broc House was built in 1971 under the 1969 permission.
During 1972 the Franciscans sought permission for a proposed change of use from a residential hostel for students to residential hostel and hotel at the premises. Dublin Corporation told them it was an exempt development and planning permission was not required.
In 2000 the Commissioners for Public Works bought the premises from the Franciscans for the purpose of accommodating asylum-seekers.
Mr Justice Gilligan said it was initially envisaged that the premises would be used as a reception centre and that persons would be accommodated there for periods of one to two weeks. However, that proposal was abandoned following an appraisal of the planning permission. The intention was to use the premises for the accommodation of asylum-seekers.
The residents contended that the 1969 permission permitted a dual or composite use for the purposes of a student hostel and a religious community.
They also contended, in effect, that even if the use from 1977 onwards (for religious purposes) was a material unauthorised use, this should not be disregarded in determining the last use of the premises prior to being purchased by the commissioners.
It was contended for the commissioners that the original permission permitted use as a residential hostel and that that permission was extant and valid. They said they bought the premises with the benefit of the 1969 planning permission which allowed for their use as a residential hostel.
It was proposed to use the premises for that purpose.
Mr Justice Gilligan said that, in his view, the permission was for the use of a residential hostel and that was the use for which the premises was intended.