Residents claim nuclear plant broke rules

The High Court has been asked to determine whether it has jurisdiction to decide if the THORP nuclear reprocessing plant at Sellafield…

The High Court has been asked to determine whether it has jurisdiction to decide if the THORP nuclear reprocessing plant at Sellafield should have been subject to an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in line with EU directives.

Four Dundalk residents, who have been pursuing a challenge to the Sellafield plant in the Irish courts since 1994, have asked the High Court to rule Britain had failed to observe EU directives in relation to the reprocessing plant and to order British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL) to comply with those directives.

Yesterday, Mr Justice Peart, who has been asked to decide the extent of the Irish court's jurisdiction in the matter, was told by Mr Paul Gallagher SC, for BNFL, that the Irish court could not pronounce or invalidate the regulatory procedures adopted and fulfilled by the sovereign bodies of another EU member-state.

That was the primary issue in the current proceedings, counsel said.

READ MORE

The four people taking the action against BNFL are Constance Short, Mary Kavanagh, Mark Deery and Ollan Herr. They have also taken proceedings against Ireland and the Attorney General alleging the State failed to take action to prevent the plant from coming into operation.

Yesterday, Mr Gallagher said the court was being asked to decide whether it had jurisdiction to declare that THORP should have been subject to an EIA within EU directives. If so, the court then had to determine if it had any jurisdiction to require compliance with EU directives via an injunction.

BNFL has argued jurisdiction for its activities is a matter for the authorities in Britain. If the Irish court rules it has jurisdiction, BNFL claims the court should decide to decline such jurisdiction or stay any proceedings on the grounds the Irish courts were not the convenient place to hear the action.

The four residents claim that, had the plant been subjected to an EIA, this would have protected their rights to full information of all risks to them and would have given them an opportunity to make representations so as to secure protection for their health and property.

The hearing is expected to continue until Friday.