or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments
High Court refuses to grant leave to appeal to the Supreme Court arising from the refusal to grant judicial review of the refusal of An Bord Pleanála to grant permission for a waste recovery facility, on the grounds that: (a) leave should only be granted for such an appeal if there were a point of law to be determined of exceptional public importance and if it was desirable in the public interest; (b) leave should be granted sparingly in accordance with principles set out in the judgment; (c) the applicant had failed to establish that there was a question relating to whether the Waste Framework Directive meant that 'proximity principle' did not apply to waste for recovery within national boundaries; and (d) having failed before the planning authority, An Bord Pleanála and the High Court, there was no public interest in allowing the applicant to make the same submissions before the Supreme Court.
Judicial review - application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court - points of law - Council Directive 75/442/EEC, as substituted by Council Directive 91/156/EC - Waste Framework Directive - whether directive properly construed - proximity principle - paragraph 5.5 of the Schedule to the Waste Management (Planning) Regulations 1997 - s. 60 of the Waste Management Acts 1996 – 2005 - policy direction issued by Minister for the Environment - s .50(4)(f)(i) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended) - whether a point of law of exceptional public importance - whether desirable in the public interest that an appeal should be taken to the Supreme Court - principles applicable to a consideration of whether to grant leave to appeal.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.