Huntsgrove Developments Ltd v Meath County Council

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judge: Mr. Justice Lardner
• Judgment Date: 01 January 1994
• Neutral Citation: 1993 WJSC-HC 3746
• Docket Number: No. 109 J.R./1992
• Court: High Court
• Date: 01 January 1994

HUNTSGROVE DEVELPOMENTS LTD v. MEATH CO COUNCIL

JUDICIAL REVIEW

BETWEEN

HUNTSGROVE DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED

APPLICANTS

AND

MEATH COUNTY COUNCIL

RESPONDENTS

1993 WJSC-HC 3746

No. 109 J.R./1992

THE HIGH COURT

Synopsis:

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Local authority

Resolution - Power - Discretion - Exercise - Administrative decision - Natural justice - Fair procedures - Decision to review development plan - Developer having built in reliance on terms of existing plan - Review instituted without notice to developer - (1992/109 JR - Lardner J. - 27/7/93) - [1994] 2 ILRM 36

|Huntsgrove Developments Ltd. v. Meath County Council|

PLANNING

Plan

Review - Necessity - Motives - Bias - Expenses of review - Contribution received from developer - Whether receipt of contribution was ~ultra vires~ planning authority - Decision to vary plan being administrative decision - Decision taken shortly after adoption of existing plan - Interests of developer advanced - Natural justice - Standard of proof to establish bias - Local Government (Planning and Development) Act, 1963, ss. 20, 21, 26 - (1992/109 JR - Lardner J. - 27/7/93) - [1994] 2 ILRM 36

|Huntsgrove Developments Ltd. v. Meath County Council|

NATURAL JUSTICE

Fair procedures

Planning - Permission - Grant - Developer - Prejudice - Planning authority - Development plan - Review - Review instituted shortly after adoption of existing plan - Developer's reliance on exclusion of competition by terms of existing plan - Review commenced without consultation with developer - (1992/109 JR - Lardner J. - 27/7/93) - [1994] 2 ILRM 36

|Huntsgrove Developments Ltd. v. Meath County Council|

WORDS AND PHRASES

"Legitimate expectation"

Planning authority - Plan - Review - Developer - Plan - Reliance - Developer having built on basis of existing development plan - Machinery for amendment of plan started without notice to developer - Administrative decision of planning authority - (1992/109 JR - Lardner J. - 27/7/93) - [1994] 2 ILRM 36

|Huntsgrove Developments Ltd. v. Meath County Council|

Citations:

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S20

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S21

O'BRIEN V BORD NA MONA 1983 IR 255

TURF DEVELOPMENT ACT 1946 S29

TURF DEVELOPMENT ACT 1946 S30

FISHER V IRISH LAND COMMISSION 1948 IR 3

MCDONALD V BORD NA GCON 1965 IR 217

LOFTUS V AG 1979 IR 221

R V SEVEN OAKS RURAL DISTRICT COUNCIL, EX PARTE TERRY 1984 JPL 420

O'NEILL V BEAUMONT HOSPITAL BOARD 1990 ILRM 419

O'NEILL & ANOR V IRISH HEREFORD BREED SOCIETY UNREP MURPHY 2.10.90 1991/5/1177

HEGARTY, STATE V WINTERS 1956 IR 320

COLLINS V CORK VEC & ORS UNREP MURPHY 27.5.82 1983/5/1209

BORD NA MONA V SISK UNREP BLAYNEY 31.5.90 1990/1/104

ASHBURY RAILWAY CARRIAGE & IRON CO V RICHE 1875 LR 7 HL 653

LOCAL GOVT ACT 1991

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S26(g)

TARA PROSPECTING LTD V MIN FOR ENERGY UNREP COSTELLO 30.4.93

LOCAL GOVT ACT 1991 S7

LOCAL GOVT ACT 1991 S8

LOCAL GOVT ACT 1991 S8(1)

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S26(h)

LOCAL GOVT (PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT) ACT 1963 S26

1 Judgment of Mr. Justice Lardner delivered the 27th day of July 1993 .

2 The Applicants (whom I will refer to as Huntsgrove) are a property company who acquired and developed a major centre of shops and offices in Ashbourne together with parking spaces at the cost of approximately £4,000,000. The Respondents are the Planning Authority for Ashbourne and the County of Meath. The reliefs claimed by the Applicants include an Order of Certiorari to quash a decision of the Respondents to revise or consider revising the Ashbourne development plan by rezoning lands at Ashbourne, Co. Meath for commercial development, being a decision of the 3rd of February 1992 to put plans for a proposed redevelopment on public display; an Order prohibiting the Respondents from rezoning any of the lands at Ashbourne, Co. Meath for commercial development or taking any steps for the purpose of rezoning or considering rezoning these lands or allowing any permission for development which is in contravention of the Ashbourne development plan of the 1st of May 1989; damages for loss resulting from the Respondents" breach of duty and breach of statutory duty or breach of constitutional duty. The application arises in the following circumstances.

3 Huntsgrove are a Company who acquired a large site in the centre of Ashbourne and obtained in 1989 planning permission to develop a shopping centre comprising 4,000 square metres with parking places for 200 cars at a cost of approximately £4,000,000. They claim this is the largest development in Ashbourne consisting of 26 commercial units employing about 100 persons. By March of 1992 all of the ground floor units had been let on 35 year leases and about two-thirds of the upper floor remained to be let. There was only one other shopping centre in Ashbourne which was approximately 200 metres distant. Huntsgrove say that at the time of their application in 1989 for planning permission they were aware that there were substantial vacant areas in Ashbourne in the immediate vacinity of the Applicants" site and that these were zoned for agricultural purposes under the Ashbourne development plan adopted by the Respondents on the 1st of May 1989. From this plan it was clear, they believed, that these vacant areas were unlikely to be developed by any commercial competitor within the remainder of the five year life of the then existing plan. Huntsgrove say they made their Application for planning permission at a cost of £10,000 and subsequently developed their site at very substantial cost relying on the contents of the 1989 development plan and in particular on their legitimate expectation that the vacant areas adjacent to their site were likely to remain zoned as agricultural land for the remainder of the life of the development plan. This situation appeared to Huntsgrove to become threatened by a sequence of events which began later in 1989. In about November 1989 Ladgrove Stores Ltd (to whom I will refer as "Ladgrove") approached the Respondents for pre-planning discussions in regard to a proposed shopping, leisure and residential development in the centre of Ashbourne. Save for the residential content the Respondents were agreeable in principle to the concept proposed though they indicated to Ladgrove that the lands proposed as their site were not appropriately zoned in the 1989 development plan for this development. This difficulty they said could be dealt with by use of the material contravention procedure in respect of the development plan or by way of an amendment of the development plan, rezoning the lands in question. Ladgrove were told the Respondents would not support the application being dealt with by way of the material contravention procedure and that if the 1989 development plan for Ashbourne were to be revised, an in depth survey and analysis in regard to the future development of the area would be the way forward; that even though the Respondents might favour undertaking the necessary review of the plan, due to financial constraints they were not in a position to do so at that time. At this point it appears from the evidence that Ladgrove enquired what would be the cost of such a review and then or later offered to pay a capital sum towards the provision of the necessary manpower and resources to prepare the review of the plan for Ashbourne, Dunshaughlin and Dunboyne areas. The Respondents carried out a costing of the work which would be involved and by letter of the 16th of February 1990 informed Ladgrove that a contribution of £25,000 from them would be required if the Respondents were to undertake the review. This letter from Mr. O'Brien, the then County Manager, is in the following terms:-

"Since our meeting, I have been examining the matter with our technician staff and we are satisfied that the scale of this development would warrant a complete new development plan for Ashbourne, including a review of roads, water and sewage proposals for the town together with an examination of all remaining verging land. As was explained at the meeting, the development which you have in mind could not be accommodated within the zoning proposals of the existing plan. As a consequence of reviewing the Ashbourne situation it will be necessary for the Council to consider some wider planning issues now in regard to Dunboyne, Clonee and Dunshaughlin. I feel this would be apparent without my having to give you any greater detail at this time.

This work would require the recruitment, assignment of professional and technical staff on a full-time basis for this project for a minimum period of 6 months. A financial contribution of £25,000 from your Company towards our costs would be required if the Council was to have the work undertaken. This sum you will appreciate would not cover the Council's direct costs of the involvement of its own permanent technician and administrative staff and usual overheads of maps, plans etc.. It must be pointed out at this stage, that the payment of this contribution could in no way be taken to imply that the Council would grant any planning permission and any subsequent planning application will be considered entirely on its merits".

4 On the 20th of February Ladgrove sent a cheque for £20,000 to the Respondents to help finance the cost of reviewing the development plan under cover of a letter of that date. It is in these terms:-

"Further to your letter dated the 16th of February 1990 and our subsequent meeting we now enclose a cheque in the amount of £20,000 to help finance the cost of the new Ashbourne development plan which is now getting under way. We confirm our agreement to pay a further £5,000 to complete this plan, should it become necessary at a later date.

We understand that Mr. R. Somers, the Chief Planner, will head the review committee and that a communication...