McDonnell v an Bord Pleanála

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Supreme Court
• Judge: O'Donnell J.,MacMenamin J.,Dunne J.
• Judgment Date: 30 November 2017
• Neutral Citation: [2017] IESCDET 128
• Date: 30 November 2017

[2017] IESCDET 128

SUPREME COURT

DETERMINATION

O'Donnell J.

MacMenamin J.

Dunne J.

BETWEEN

DERMOT McDONNELL

APPLICANT

AND

AN BORD PLEANÁLA

RESPONDENT

AND

OWENINNY POWER DAC

NOTICE PARTY

APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO WHICH ARTICLE 34.5.4° OF THE CONSTITUTION APPLIES

Result: The Court does not grant leave to the Applicant to appeal to this Court directly from the High Court.

Reasons Given:

1 In this case the applicant seeks both an extension of time within which to bring this application, and also leave to appeal to this Court from the decision of the High Court (Haughton J), delivered on the 31st of May 2017, in which it appears that he determined a number of matters: first, a determination that the applicant's application for judicial review was itself out of time; second, refusing to extend time for judicial review on the express grounds that the applicant's case could not succeed; third, setting aside the leave to seek judicial review granted by Humphries J on the 12th of December 2016; fourth, holding that a certificate of the High Court was required under s.50A(7) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) to permit an appeal to the Court of Appeal from a decision of the High Court which terminated an application for judicial review in planning matters, and where that decision was made on the basis of consideration of the merits of the case even though the decision before the Court was whether or not to extend time for the grant of judicial reviews; and fifth, refusing such a certificate.

2 It is apparent that a number of potentially complex legal issues arose in this case. Furthermore, the judge was careful to observe that his decision that the application for judicial review was itself out of time, was not a decision to which s.50A applied. However, it does not appear that the applicant has taken any steps to appeal that decision. That said, the applicant seeks leave to appeal pursuant to Article 34.5.4 of the Constitution (leapfrog) to this Court from the entirety of the High Court decision.

3 This Court has observed in the determinations in Grace v An Bord Pleanála [2016] IESC Det 29, and OMR v Minister for Justice [2017] IESC Det 14, that arising from the 33rd amendment of the Constitution it is now possible to seek to appeal to the Supreme Court under the leapfrog provisions from decisions of the High Court which are subject to statutory restrictions on appeal which...