Fox v Wicklow County Council and Others

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: High Court
• Judge: Mr Justice David Holland
• Judgment Date: 30 June 2026
• Neutral Citation: [2026] IEHC 412
• Docket Number: Record No. 2023 377 JR

In the Matter of Section 50 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (As Amended)

Between

John Fox

Applicant

and

Wicklow County Council, Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage

and

Office of the Planning Regulator

Respondents

[2026] IEHC 412

Record No. 2023 377 JR

THE HIGH COURT

JUDICIAL REVIEW

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT

Judicial review – Planning and development – Reasons – Applicant seeking to quash the impugned Direction – Whether there was a failure to provide adequate reasons

Facts: The applicant, Mr Fox, applied to the High Court seeking: (a) certiorari quashing the Planning and Development (Wicklow County Development Plan 2022-2028) Direction 2023 (the Impugned Direction) either generally or insofar as it affects Mr Fox’s lands or bears on the zoning thereof in the Wicklow County Development Plan 2022-2028; (b) if necessary, certiorari quashing any amendments to the Development Plan effected by the Impugned Direction and/or any consequential steps taken by the first respondent, Wicklow County Council (the Council), on foot thereof insofar as it affects Mr Fox’s lands or bears on their zoning in the Development Plan; (c) if necessary, certiorari quashing the Development Plan to the extent required to ensure that the zoning of Mr Fox’s lands accords with law and/or is reinstated as per the Development Plan as initially adopted by the Elected Members of the Council on 12 September 2022; (d) a declaration that the Development Plan, as adopted on 12 September 2022, shall have full force and effect as it relates to the zoning of Mr Fox’s lands; (e) an order pursuant to s. 50A(9) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 declaring to be invalid or quashing the part or parts of the Development Plan as amended by the Impugned Direction which the court finds to be invalid; (f) a declaration that the Impugned Direction and/or the accompanying Statement of Reasons dated 21 February 2023 are unlawful, void and in breach of s. 31 of the 2000 Act, in consequence whereof any subsequent decision and/or actions taken on foot thereof are unlawful and void. The Core Grounds pursued by Mr Fox were: (1) failure to provide adequate reasons for the decision to excise Amendment V1-11(a) (Kilpedder-Willowgrove) from the Development Plan as made by the elected members of the Council such that, in the Development Plan, the Kilpedder-Willowgrove development boundary reverts to that envisaged in the Draft Development Plan; and (2) irrationality and/or disproportionality and/or failure to take account of relevant considerations and/or overreach of the legislative intent of s. 31 of the 2000 Act in that it represents a disproportionate interference in the democratic representation of the elected members of the Council as enshrined by Article 28A of the Constitution.

Held by Holland J that, as to the law of reasons as laid down in cases such as Connelly v An Bord Pleanála [2021] 2 IR 752 and McCarthy Meats Ltd v Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government [2020] IEHC 371, the reasons stated adequately enabled Mr Fox to understand why the decision to make the Impugned Direction went, as to his lands, the way it did. Counsel for Mr Fox acknowledged that this was a “reasons” case. Holland J agreed both given the focus of the arguments at trial and also as he considered that Ground 2 presented, as it related to Article 28A and disproportionality and in the matter of legal argument, a very steep hill for Mr Fox to climb and counsel sensibly did not really make the attempt.

Holland J dismissed the proceedings.

Proceedings dismissed.

Contents

JUDGMENT OF MR JUSTICE DAVID HOLLAND DELIVERED 30 JUNE 2026	3
INTRODUCTION	3
STATUTORY SCHEME	4
S.31 PDA 2000	5
S.31AN PDA 2000	9
RELIEFS SOUGHT	10
CORE GROUNDS & PART-DECISION OF GROUND 2	11
IMPUGNED DIRECTION – 21 February 2023	13
Whereas	13
Hereby Directs As Follows:	13
Statement Of Reasons	14
Statement of Reasons – 21 February 2023	15
CHRONOLOGY	15
OPR's s.31AM Submission of 25 May 2022 on Proposed Amendments & MA Recommendation 3	17
MA Recommendation 3	18
CE Report, July 2022 & Making of Development Plan, 12 September 2022	19
OPR's S.31AM(8) Notice & Proposed Draft Direction – 7 October 2022	19
CSO Settlement Boundaries	23
Minister's s.31 Notice of Intention & Draft Direction – 24 October 2022	24
Farry Submission, 16 November 2022	26
OPR's S.31AN(4) Notice & Proposed Draft Direction – 12 January 2023 & Impugned Direction – 21 February 2023	27
Publication – Table	31
GROUND 1 – REASONS FOR IMPUGNED DIRECTION	32
The Plea & Mr Fox's Position	32
State & OPR Position	33
Council Position	34
Reasons – Discussion & Decision	35
Connelly	35
A Caution	37
Mr Fox's Efforts to Ascertain Reasons	37
Are the Contents of the OPR's s.31AN(4) and s.31AM(8) Notices and s.31AM Submissions Discernible as Containing Reasons for the Impugned Direction?	39
S.31AN(4) Notice – 21 February 2023	39
S.31AM(8) Notice – 7 October 2022	41
s.31AM Submissions & Recommendations – 25 May 2022	42
The “Stated Reasons” Requirement	43
Some Conclusions	44
Adequacy of Reasons	44
REMAINS OF GROUND 2	47
CONCLUSION	47

JUDGMENT OF Mr Justice David Holland DELIVERED 30 JUNE 2026.

INTRODUCTION1

1. The Applicant, (“Mr Fox”) is a farmer and landowner of Sunnybank Farm, The Downs, Co. Wicklow. These proceedings relate to the planning policy status of about 1.2 ha, comprising about half a field, in that farm. I will refer to that 1.2 ha as “Mr Fox's Lands”. They lie on the western edge of the developed area of Willowgrove – which is the northern part of Kilpedder – Willowgrove village. For local planning policy purposes, and since at least 2013, the development boundary of that village has run along the eastern boundary of Mr Fox's Lands. Mr Fox's Lands are thereby outside the development boundary. Immediately inside it lies the “Downhill Woods” housing estate in Willowgrove. The undisputed premise of the case is that the prospect of planning permission for residential development on Mr Fox's Lands is appreciably increased or decreased depending whether they are inside or outside the development boundary. Mr Fox emphasises that he intends three houses for his children on the lands.

2. Though the term “zoning” appears frequently in the papers, this case is not, strictly, about zoning – it is about a village development boundary for development plan settlement strategy purposes. However, the various analyses in the statutory process understandably consider both types — zoning and development boundaries – together, almost as if interchangeable, as they raise similar issues. Kilpedder – Willowgrove village is, for development plan settlement strategy purposes, a “Level 7 Villages (Type 1)” settlement.2 Lands in Level 7 Settlements are not zoned.3 Rather, they are enclosed by settlement development boundaries to identify the areas within the settlement and distinguish them from rural areas. Such settlements are described in the Wicklow County Development Plan 2022–2028 (the “Development Plan”) in the following terms,4

“These are rural villages that have a moderate level of existing infrastructural services, both physical and social, and that are of such a size as to accommodate a moderate amount of new housing. These settlements generally have a population of less than 500, with many considerably smaller.

These settlements provide a range of local community services and facilities including for example a church, primary school, shop, community hall, sports ground, pub and post office. These villages are an important focal point for rural communities. In order to safeguard their continued existence into the future, it is important that growth is managed in a sustainable manner.

…………………..

In these settlements it is essential that growth is supported while also strictly managed so that development is undertaken in a manner that is respectful to the character of these villages, their infrastructural capacity and the environmental sensitivities of the rural area. ….

The scale of new residential development should be in proportion to the scale, pattern and grain of the existing village. Expansion of the village should be commensurate within the existing village structure and should proceed on the basis of a number of well integrated sites including infill sites within and around the village centre rather than focusing on one very large site. In order to facilitate commensurate growth, any individual scheme for new housing should not be larger than 10 units.”

3. For the avoidance of doubt, Mr Fox's Lands have never been zoned for development. Nor have they ever been within the Kilpedder — Willowgrove village development boundary. Cutting a very long story short, the Elected Members of the Council made the Development Plan including Mr Fox's Lands within the Kilpedder — Willowgrove village development boundary, but the Minister5 by direction issued pursuant to s.31 PDA 20006 to Wicklow County Council (“the Council”) — the Planning and Development (Wicklow County Development Plan 2022–2028) Direction 2023 (the “Impugned Direction”) — in effect amended the Development Plan, inter alia, excluding Mr Fox's Lands from the area within the Kilpedder — Willowgrove village development boundary. In these proceedings, Mr Fox seeks to overturn the Impugned Direction.

STATUTORY SCHEME

4. The statutory scheme within which a Ministerial Direction pursuant to s.31 PDA 2000 is made is highly iterative and complex. It has been described in...