Two High Court actions arising from a dispute related to access to a period house and its estate in Co Kildare have been settled.
Save Castletown Committee CLG in May brought a High Court action over gates and connected fencing erected by the owners of a 235-acre parcel of land within the historic demesne of Castletown House in Celbridge, Co Kildare.
Campaigners had claimed the gates and fencing were blocking public vehicular access to the house and grounds via a road known as Gay’s Avenue.
Celio Properties Ltd, Kilross Properties Ltd, Liffey Bridge Homes Ltd and Springwood Properties Ltd acquired the parcel of land in April 2023.
READ MORE
The rest of the estate – including the lands where the 18th-century house is situated – is owned by the Office of Public Works.
Save Castletown Committee, with an address at Woodview, Castletown, Celbridge, had sought an order requiring the developer companies to remove the gates and fencing.
The companies, with registered addresses at Millennium Park, Naas, Co Kildare, and Turnings, Straffan, Co Kildare, then brought separate High Court proceedings against Save Castletown Committee and two of its directors, Fintan Monaghan and Treasa Keegan.
In the developers’ proceedings, they argue the committee has “wrongfully asserted” that their lands are subject to a public right of way and a public right of access. This claim was denied.
On Thursday, Ms Justice Emily Farrell said she was happy to accept certain declarations made by both parties in the cases, and made an order striking out the proceedings with no order for costs. No further details were outlined in court.
Last month, the judge dismissed Save Castletown’s motion to strike out the case brought by the companies against Save Castletown and its directors.
In its motion, Save Castletown argued the developers’ proceedings represented an abuse of process, and were brought for the purposes of preventing it from pursuing its case over the erection of the gates and fences, an example of a Slapp case. Save Castletown also argued the case was bound to fail.
Ms Justice Farrell held the developers had a rational basis for pursuing their case, and said she “reject[ed] the contention that these proceedings were issued as Slapp proceedings or that they amount to an abuse of process”.
