Court puts development for Ballymore Eustace on hold

THE SUPREME Court has upheld arguments by An Taisce that the question of whether a housing and retail development at Ballymore Eustace, Co Kildare, should be put on hold until the High Court determines a key issue in the case.

The five-judge court yesterday found “exceptional and unusual circumstances” required the court to revisit its own declaration last year that Abbeydrive Developments Ltd is entitled to default planning permission for its proposed development of houses, shops, a creche and a medical centre at Ballymore Eustace.

That decision is now on hold pending a future High Court decision, and a possible Supreme Court decision on appeal, as to whether a default permission may be legally granted in the absence of an environmental impact assessment as required by a European directive.

The 2009 Supreme Court declaration, upholding a 2005 High Court decision, was granted on grounds of Kildare County Council’s failure to make a decision on Abbeydrive’s planning application within the eight-week period set down by law.

Abbeydrive applied for the permission on December 2nd, 2002, and, unless there was a request served for further information, the eight-week period expired on February 5th, 2003. A notice for further information was served by the council a day later.

The Supreme Court granted its declaration in July 2009 but had not made final orders in the case because An Taisce raised concerns.

An Taisce, which was incorrectly told by the council in 2007 the planning application was deemed withdrawn and was unaware of the legal action until it read a newspaper report in July 2009, raised concerns a default permission in the circumstances of the case was contrary to European law. An Taisce argued the proposed development, because it was subject to the requirements of a 1985 European directive relating to Environmental Impact Assessments, could not be the subject of a default permission.

It said a valid permission could not have been given because of the council’s failure to assess the EIS submitted by Abbeydrive.