If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)

Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

[Article] More judges 'needed to handle planning reviews'

08-05-2004 10:51pm

#1

Victor

Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 78,580 ✭✭✭✭

Join Date: December 2000

Posts: 68941

http://www.sbpost.ie/web/DocumentView/did-151303814-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FNews.asp

More judges 'needed to handle planning reviews'
02/05/04 00:00
By Kieron Wood

A High Court judge has called for a "significant increase" in the number of judges to handle the growing number of judicial reviews of planning decisions.

Mr Justice Aindrias O Caoimh said there were simply not enough High Court judges to ensure the efficient dispatch of all the cases coming before the courts.

O Caoimh, speaking at the launch of a book on planning and development law, said: "The huge growth in planning law is reflected in the great number of planning applications . . . This is mirrored by the very significant number of judicial

review applications coming before the High Court in the planning field. Insofar as there is now a demand for designated judges in the context of roads projects, as well as planning generally, if such aspirations are to be realised, it will be necessary for those responsible to make the necessary resources available, most particularly by a significant increase in the number of judges serving in the High Court."

The book's author, barrister Garrett Simons, said that part of the reason for the increase in judicial reviews was the poor drafting of the legislation.

"The Planning and Development Act 2000 is very badly drafted and laid out, with much repetition and confusing cross-referencing," he said. "But there are more serious defects. For example, the act increases the limitation period on enforcement action from five years to seven years, yet there is no indication what is to happen to unauthorised developments in existence for between five and seven years when the act came into force.

"In relation to social and affordable housing, the 2000 Act exemption for development of less than 0.2 hectares was reduced to 0.1 hectare under the Planning and Development (Amendment) Act, 2002.

"But the draftsman forgot to change all references to 0.2 hectares, so the amended Section 97 refers inconsistently to 0.1 and 0.2 hectares."

0