Finn v Bray U.D.C.

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date08 December 1969
Date08 December 1969
Docket Number[1967. No. 2261 P.]
CourtHigh Court
[1967. No. 2261 P.]
Finn v. Bray U.D.C.
ANNA TERESA FINN
Plaintiff
and
BRAY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL
Defendants.

Local Government - Planning - Draft plan - Objections - Amendment of draft plan - Whether amendment should be advertised - Development plan made by planning authority incorporating amendment - local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963 (No. 28 of 1963), ss. 19-22.

Plenary Summons.

The plaintiff was the leasehold owner and rated occupier of a dwellinghouse, garden and premises at Putland Road in the Urban District of Bray in the County of Wicklow. The defendants, who were the planning authority for that area for the purposes of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963, by resolution dated the 16th May, 1967, adopted a draft of a proposed development plan and then gave notice thereof in the issue of the Iris Oifigiúil of the 26th May, 1967, and in the issue of the 27th May, 1967, of The Wicklow People newspaper. The notice further stated that a copy of the draft proposed development plan was available for inspection until the 30th August, 1967; that objections or representations would be taken into consideration before the making of the development plan; and that any objecting ratepayer might include in his objection a request to state his case before an appointee or appointees of the defendants.

The plaintiff's property was within the area of Objective No. 16 in the draft plan (map reference No. R.1) and it was proposed to acquire and clear all the property within that area and to arrange for suitable commercial development of tourist amenity value. On the 25th August, 1965, the plaintiff, as an objecting ratepayer, lodged with the defendants a written objection to the draft development plan and on the 12th September, 1967, she appeared by counsel before the appointees of the defendants in support of her said objection.

On the 26th September, 1967, the defendants, having considered the draft development plan and having considered the plaintiff's objections, made amendments to the draft development plan (including an amendment which affected the plaintiff's property) and by resolution they adopted the draft development plan as amended and purported to make a development plan in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963. There had been no prior notification or publication by the defendants of their intention to make any amendments to the draft development plan, nor had the plaintiff been notified of the result of her objection.

The plaintiff commenced proceedings against the defendants by plenary summons dated the 28th September, 1967, wherein the plaintiff claimed (1) a declaration that in passing the resolution on the 26th September, 1967, the defendants had acted ultra vires the provisions of the Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963, and (2) an injunction restraining the defendants from including in the proposed development plan Objective No. 16 (map reference No. R.1) until the requirements of the Act of 1963 had been complied with. The plaintiff obtained an interim injunction on the 28th September, 1967, and an interlocutory injunction on the 20th October, 1967.

The defendants pleaded in their defence, inter alia, that, having published the fact that it was proposed to make a development plan and the plaintiff having made objections thereto which were considered by the defendants, they were under no obligation to give any further notice of intention to make a development plan, nor to publish any further notices; and they further pleaded that the development plan made on the 26th September, 1967, was a new and integral development plan.

The following portions of ss. 19-22 of the Act of 1963 were referred to by Butler J. in the course of his judgment, post:—

"19.—(1) Every planning authority shall, within the period of three years beginning on the appointed day (or such longer period as the Minister may in any particular case allow), make a plan indicating development objectives for their area.

(2) A development plan shall consist of a written statement and a plan indicating the development objectives for the area in question, including objectives—

  • (a) with respect to county boroughs, boroughs, urban districts and scheduled towns—

    • (i) for the use solely or primarily (as may be indicated in the development plan) of particular areas for particular purposes (whether residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural or otherwise),

    • (ii) for securing the greater convenience and safety of road users and pedestrians by the provision of parking places or road improvements or otherwise,

    • (iii) for development and renewal of obsolete areas,

    • (iv) for preserving, improving and extending amenities;

  • (b) with respect to other areas;

    • (i) for development and renewal of obsolete areas,

    • (ii) for preserving, improving and extending amenities,

    • (iii) for the provision of new water supplies and sewerage services and the extension of existing such supplies and services."

"(6) (a) The making of an application to the Minister for the allowance of such a longer period as is referred to in subsection (1) of this section shall be a reserved function.

(b) Where a planning authority have applied to the Minister for the allowance of such a longer period as is referred to in subsection (1) of this section, they shall cause notice of the application to be published in at least one newspaper circulating in their area and in the Iris Oifigiúil.

(c) A notice under the foregoing paragraph—

  • (i) shall specify the longer period applied for, and

  • (ii) shall state that objections with respect to the application made to the Minister within a specified period of not less than one month will be taken into consideration before the grant of the application (and such objections shall be taken into consideration accordingly).

(7) The making of a development plan or any...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Byrne v Fingal County Council
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 2 August 2001
    ...GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S21 LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S21(A) FINN V BRAY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL (UDC) 1969 IR 169 HUNTSGROVE DEVELOPMENTS V MEATH CO COUNCIL 1994 2 ILRM 36 LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1990 LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) AC......
  • Blessington Heritage Trust Ltd v Wicklow County Council
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 January 1999
    ...2ED 361 ELM DEVELOPMENTS, STATE V BORD PLEANALA 1981 ILRM 108 AHERN V KERRY CO COUNCIL 1988 ILRM 382 FINN V BRAY URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL 1969 IR 169 HAMILTON V HAMILTON 1982 IR 466 QUINLIVAN V GOV OF PORTLAOISE PRISON & DPP 1998 2 IR 113 MAXWELL INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES 12ED 215 Synopsi......
  • Killegland Estates Ltd v Meath County Council
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 July 2022
    ...zoning affects private property, any landowner's representations should be considered, relying on Finn v. Bray Urban District Council [1969] I.R. 169, Central Dublin Development Association v. The Attorney General [1975] 109 I.L.T.R. 69 at p. 90, and Glencar Explorations Plc. v. Mayo County......
  • Construction Industry Federation v Dublin City Council
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 18 March 2005
    ...v. Sutton [1980] I.R. 269. Duffy v. Waterford Corporation (Unreported, High Court, McGuinness J., 21st July, 1999). Finn v. Bray U.D.C. [1969] I.R. 169. Howard v. Commissioners of Public Works [1994] 1 I.R. 10; [1993] I.L.R.M. 665. Inspector of Taxes v. Tiernan [1981] I.R. 117; [1982] I.L.R......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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