O'Donoghue v an Bord Pleanála

JurisdictionIreland
CourtSupreme Court
Judgment Date01 January 1991
Date01 January 1991
(H.C.)
O'Donoghue
and
An Bord Pleanála

Whether decision ultra vires - Refusal of permission by planning authority - Appeal to An Bord Pleanála allowed - Whether advertisement of application for permission adequate - Whether decision of An Bord Pleanála ultra vires -Whether decision unreasonable - Whether failure to keep appropriate records sufficient to render decision a nullity.

On 27 October, 1989, the planning authority, Dublin County Council, refused an application by the second-named respondent for permission to construct a bungalow on lands sometimes described as 'Site One at Old Rectory Park, Taney Road, Dundrum' on the grounds that the proposed development was considered to be an overdevelopment of the site and did not comply with site development standards as detailed in the county development plan. The second-named respondent appealed this decision to the first-named respondent An Bord Pleanála (the board). In a report to the first-named respondent dated 16 February, 1990, a senior inspector with the board recommended the refusal of the permission sought on the grounds, inter alia, that the proposed development would constitute an overdevelopment of the site. By letter dated 12 April, 1990, the applicant made submissions in writing to the board urging rejection of the second-named respondent's appeal. Notwithstanding the recommendation of the senior inspector and the objections of the applicant, by order dated 1 August, 1990, the board granted the permission sought subject to a number of conditions, being of the view that the proposed construction of the bungalow would not constitute overdevelopment of the site or be injurious to properties in the vicinity and that it would accord with the proper planning and development of the area. The applicant sought an order of certiorari quashing the decision of the board dated 1 August, 1990, on the grounds, firstly, that there were material defects in the public advertisement of the application for permission and secondly that the decision of the first-named respondent was ultra vires on the basis that it was an unreasonable exercise of the decision making power of the board and that the board had failed to keep a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
90 cases
  • McKenna v The Control Appeal Committee of the Irish Greyhound Board (Bord na gCon)
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 9 November 2018
    ...The respondent's submissions 19 The respondent argued as follows: - (1) The respondent refers to O'Donoghue v. An Bord Pleanala [1991] ILRM 750 wherein Murphy J. stated at p. 757 that the reasons furnished must be sufficient to enable the court to review that the tribunal has directed its ......
  • O'Neill v Bord Pleanála
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 May 2009
    ...9.9.2008 2008 IEHC 289 SOUTH BUCKINGHAMSHIRE DISTRICT COUNCIL v PORTER (NO 2) 2004 1 WLR 1953 2004 4 AER 775 O'DONOGHUE v BORD PLEANALA 1991 ILRM 750 1991/5/1081 DUNNE & MACKENZIE v BORD PLEANALA & ORS UNREP MCGOVERN 14.12.2006 2006/16/3370 2006 IEHC 400 O'KEEFFE v BORD PLEANALA 1993 1 IR......
  • Pinewood Wind Ltd v The Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government ; Element Power Ltd v The Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 7 December 2018
    ...that a draft development plan is itself a reasoned document. Discussion of failure to give reasons 11 In O'Donoghue v. An Bord Pleanala [1991] ILRM 750, at p. 757, Murphy J. stated that: - ‘ It has never been suggested that an administrative body is bound to provide a discursive judgment as......
  • Law Society of Ireland v Coleman
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 21 December 2018
    ...must give reasons for so doing. Such bodies must satisfy the criteria identified by Murphy J. in O'Donoghue v. An Bord Pleanála [1991] I.L.R.M. 750, where he said in the context of a decision given by the Planning Board that it: - “…must be sufficient first to enable the courts to review it......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • A critical assessment of the duty of District Court judges to give reasons
    • Ireland
    • Irish Judicial Studies Journal Nbr. 1-17, January 2017
    • 1 January 2017
    ...sentence. As Ashworth notes 27[2011] IEHC 306 hereafter “Mallak” 28Interestingly, Kenny is not referenced in Oates. 29Oates, para. 51 30[1991] ILRM 750 31O’Donoghue v. An Bord Pleanála [1991] ILRM 750, at 757 32Mallak v. Minister for Justice [2012] 3 IR 297, Fennelly J. stated at p.322, par......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT