Latest news with #unauthoriseddevelopment
Irish Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Irish Times
Couple fails to stop demolition of Co Meath home built in ‘wilful' breach of planning laws almost 20 years ago
A couple have lost a last ditch legal bid at preventing the demolition of their large Co Meath home built in 'wilful breach' of planning laws almost 20 years ago. There was 'no merit' to the appeals by Chris Murray and his wife Rose, Mr Justice Senan Allen said, when giving the three judge Court of Appeal 's judgment dismissing them. The appeals concerned an action that, while initiated in September 2022, was 'the latest battle' in a 20-year war about the fate of the unauthorised development at Faughan Hill, Bohermeen, Navan . It was, he believed, obvious to Meath County Council from the outset that the action and appeal were 'artifices calculated to postpone the evil day'. READ MORE After Mr Murray's 2006 application for permission to build a house on the lands was refused, the couple, 'undaunted, and in wilful breach of the planning laws', built a house anyway of about 588 sq m (6,220 sq ft), twice the size of the house for which permission was refused, the judge said. The council took proceedings in 2007 under the Planning Act and in 2017 the Supreme Court upheld High Court orders for the couple to remove any unauthorised development from their land. They were given one year to vacate the property. When that was not complied with, the council issued contempt proceedings in 2019 that settled in 2020 on terms involving the Murrays agreeing to vacate the property within two years to facilitate the council demolishing it. The council issued contempt proceedings in 2019 that settled in 2020 on terms involving the Murrays agreeing to vacate the property within two years to facilitate the council demolishing it Three days before they were to vacate, the Murrays issued a case against the council, claiming there was new evidence relating to land sterilisation agreements made by the previous owners of the land that invalidated the council's planning refusals. Last year the High Court granted a council application to strike out that case as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. In the Court of Appeal judgment on Tuesday, Mr Justice Allen said the couple built a 6,220 sq ft house without planning permission, 'well knew' they would need permission 'but hoped they would get away with it'. The Murrays claimed, as a result of actions, inactions and misrepresentations by the council, they had acquired a 'pig in a poke' title to the lands, he said. While a planning condition for a nearby residence stated an agreement sterilising (preventing) the lands from any other housing or non-agricultural development should be entered into – and the council relied on that in refusing permission to the Murrays – it was accepted no sterilisation agreement was ever entered. There was 'no justification' for contending the council misrepresented the case to the court, he said. The Murrays had not appealed the original permission refusal to An Bord Pleanála or sought to judicially review it, he said. They had had 'every opportunity' to make whatever case they thought they had; the courts had considered all they had to say but the Supreme Court had, in 2017, decided the house 'had to come down'. While they argued in this appeal that adequate account was not taken of their new evidence, there was no appeal against the High Court conclusion it would not have affected the original outcome. At the heart of their opposition to the council's enforcement procedures was a grievance with the refusal of their original planning application but, as a matter of law, that grievance was 'not justiciable'. Any infirmity in the original refusal could not conceivably have provided any justification for unauthorised construction of a house, still less one twice the size, he said. It was 'perverse' that the Murrays, having 'driven a coach and four' through the planning Act, were complaining the council failed 'to strictly comply with the prescribed procedures'. A 'so-called constitutional challenge' concerning the council's use of section 160 of the Planning and Development Act 2000 in its proceedings was unrelated to the new evidence, he said. The couple's fresh permission retention applications were not relevant to whether their proceedings raised a fair issue to be tried, he held. The couple had not identified any error in the decision under appeal, the court concluded.
Irish Times
31-07-2025
- Irish Times
Pair aware of consequences of breaching ban on works at ancient burial site, court hears
Two men have told a judge they understood the consequences of breaching a court order prohibiting unauthorised development works at an ancient Christian burial ground in Dublin. Judge John O'Connor granted Fingal County Council injunctions restraining Jonathan Coyle, of Colecott Cottages, Ballough, Lusk, Co Dublin, and Conor Noone, Maynooth Park, Maynooth, Co Kildare, from continuing with allegedly unauthorised works at River Road, Castleknock, after human bones were unearthed. Neither man was present when the orders were made earlier this week at the Circuit Civil Court. On Thursday Stephen Dodd SC, for the local authority, told the court the defendants had, before the court orders were made, conducted site clearance works on a national monument where hundreds of human skeletal remains had been professionally excavated in the late 1930s. READ MORE A silver coin of Edgar of England dated 967 was found, indicating the site was used in the 10th century. Mr Dodd said works last week unearthed more human bones, giving rise to a serious concern irreparable harm had already been caused to what had long been an officially recorded monument. Liam Rooney, planning inspector with Fingal County Council, told the court in written evidence he had seen new excavation works including the excavation of a metre-deep trench, most likely intended for drainage. Human remains were unearthed and taken away by An Garda Síochána for the coroner's office to determine if they were ancient. Judge O'Connor heard no consents had been provided for the new works. Mr Dodd said the case could be adjourned until early October to allow the defendants to submit written evidence. The existing restraints will remain in place.
BreakingNews.ie
12-05-2025
- BreakingNews.ie
Legal challenge over alleged unauthorised gates blocking access to Castletown House
A community group has claimed in the High Court that a set of gates allegedly blocking public access to a period house and its estate in Co Kildare is an unauthorised development. Save Castletown Committee CLG claim the gates and connected fencing, erected by the owners of a 235-acre parcel of land within the historic demesne of Castletown House in Celbridge, are blocking public vehicular to the house and grounds via a road known as Gay's Avenue. Advertisement The committee is seeking an order requiring the owners to remove the gates and fencing, on the grounds that planning permission was not obtained for their erection. According to court documents, Save Castletown Committee was established in September 2023 after the Office of Public Works did not acquire the 235-acres parcel of land within the historic demesne of Castletown House. The land was instead acquired by a group of related companies, the respondents in the action: Celio Properties Ltd, Kilross Properties Ltd, Liffey Bridge Homes Ltd and Springwood Properties Ltd. The 235-acre, privately-owned parcel makes up part of the historic demesne of Castletown House. The State-owned part of the historic demesne includes the grounds on which the house itself is built on. Advertisement On Monday, Save Castletown Committee's counsel John Rogers SC, appearing with Peter Leonard BL and instructed by FP Logue solicitors, said his side were looking for 'some priority' in seeking a hearing date. Appearing for respondent parties, Michael O'Donnell BL said Kildare County Council considers the erected gates to be an exempted development. Mr Justice Richard Humphreys listed the case for an expedited hearing date, set for late July. In a sworn statement, Fintan Monaghan, chairperson of Save Castletown Committee, says that the public has previously 'enjoyed habitual access' to Castletown House via Gay's Avenue. Gay's Avenue connects an access point to the house to the northern entrance to the historic demesne, which is close to the M4 motorway. Advertisement The erection of the gates and fencing has blocked all public vehicular access to the house and demesne grounds, Mr Monaghan claims. 'The lack of vehicular access has significantly limited the ability of the public to habitually access this recreational and tourist amenity,' he says. Mr Monaghan says that the ongoing blocking of access to Castletown House at Gay's Avenue is having a 'severe impact' on the local community. Ireland Environmental group brings court challenge against... Read More He claims the gates obstruct the primary route from the M4 motorway to the demesne, and could potentially delay emergency medical services from reaching the northside of the demesne, or access the demesne via the M4 in a timely manner. Advertisement The gates could also impact tourism and recreation at Castletown House, Mr Monaghan says, and threaten the financial viability of the house. This could have a knock on effect on local business, he says. Mr Monaghan says his group's purpose is to promote public access to the Castletown House estate, and the reunification of the historic demesne lands. '[Save Castletown House] believes that Castletown lands are of vital historical, cultural, and ecological significance for the community of Celbridge and Leixlip, and therefore considers that they should be in State ownership for the use and benefit of the people of the area and for the State as a whole,' he says.
