Planning delays to infrastructure

I often see posters complaining about appeals and objections to various infrastructure projects and how much this impacts on the time lines.

What many people don't take into account is the lack of resources in planning depts, ABP and the courts.

Case in point, the President of the High Court requested 15-20 new High Court judges to be appointed, 5 were approved but the delays in approving them for the court resulted in the announcement of multiple very high profile cases being removed from the docket.

The resulting embarrassment from this motivated the govt to get 4 of the 5 judges appointed asap to allow these cases to proceed as scheduled

Judicial appointments to be rushed through after High Court President announced cancellation of murder and rape trials

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/judicial-appointments-to-be-rushed-through-after-high-court-president-announced-cancellation-of-murder-and-rape-trials-40908945.html

My point is, it suits the govt to have the blame for delays to be laid at the feet of objectors when a lot of the blame resides with the govt themselves through the poor provision of resources to the relevant bodies.

CatInABox

Yes, ABP has been screaming for resources too. In fairness, they underestimated the amount of work that the SHD scheme would generate, which is a bit foolish.

Sam Russell

Courts only sit for a few hours a day. Could they not start the court day at 9 AM and continue until 5 PM with an hour for lunch? It would double the amount of court time.

A lot of court time is wasted by poor efficiency of their procedures. That should be addressed also.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117970186#Comment_117970186

You do realise that the Judge needs time to consider the cases presented to him or her? More Judges are needed.

Justice system is ignored in Ireland. Gardai, Judges, DPP, Prison and youth diversion systems are under-resourced but there is plenty of money for support of Horse and Greyhound racing "pastimes".

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117970186#Comment_117970186

Someone more well versed in the procedures than I should be able to elaborate more but as I understand it, what happens in the courtroom is only one part of the courts operations.

Sam Russell

I am not versed in the court system in any way.

I have been called for jury service twice and was surprised at how poorly the procedure was organised. Much court time is taken up selecting a jury - much of this could be done outside of court time. Plus, it would be a good idea to have a few extra reserve jurors to cover for jurors falling sick. An important trial was stopped because a third juror had fallen sick, and has to be rescheduled. With say 15 jurors empanelled with the 12 selected randomly when the jury is sent to consider the verdict would work.

I understand that much work is done by judges away from court, but more time in court will shorten cases. That would obviously help throughput of the cases before the court.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/117970289#Comment_117970289

I understand that much work is done by judges away from court, but more time in court will shorten cases.

No doubt, but as I said, presentation of cases in court is only 1 part.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter how many hours are in the courtroom, if there are not enough judges then cases are not going to be heard a la the article above.

Sam Russell

True, we need more judges. So why the reluctance to appoint them?

Pete_Cavan

Looks like ye are getting your wish lads;

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/c2295-minister-humphreys-launches-open-consultation-on-judicial-planning/

The Working Group is now issuing on open call to interested parties for submissions in relation to the following themes:

the number and type of judges required in Ireland in the next five years, and longer term to ensure the efficient administration of justice

the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, demographic changes, and implications of Brexit in regard to court caseloads and the subsequent resource requirements

the development of judicial skills

the extent to which efficiencies in case management and working practices, as well as enhanced digital technology, could help in meeting additional service demands, improving services, and access to justice

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118038638#Comment_118038638

Nice one

I'm particularly happy to see the OECD being involved as their recommendations will form part of the final reports so if they don't at least give them serious consideration it'll look like a farce

Also, regarding

"The government’s commitment to ensuring the courts are adequately resourced is illustrated by the recent increase in the number of High Court judges by five. This was one of the largest increases in living memory, bringing the total number of High Court judges to 42.

As highlighted in the first post on this thread, the only reason we even got those 5 was because the govt had to be shamed in the national papers into appointing them. Its also only 33% of the total qty requested so really, there should be 52 justices, not 42.

Its a step in the right direction at least

Nobody will claim the Irish planning system is fast, efficient, effective. This mainly comes from a deficit of resources throughout the whole system.

The govt (FG) appear to be making moves to address the slow planning process.

However, rather than providing resources to the courts to speed up judicial reviews, to ABP to speed up application reviews, to Council planning depts to speed up consultations and planning approvals they will be taking a different approach.

Instead they are looking to close off a number of opportunities for appeal, make it more expensive, limit it to only certain parties, limit the grounds on which to appeal etc.

Make no mistake, regardless of what you think about the planning system, this is purely a plan to strip existing legal rights from the public at large.

http://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2022/0203/1277495-planning/

But they will face barriers to bringing this in.

Firstly the Green Party will never sign off on limiting the right to appeal. Expect legal challenges from the GP if this gets enacted.

Secondly the European Commission have also, again, criticised the govt for the ridiculously expensive process that currently exists for the public to appeal on environmental grounds. It has also been quite clear that it will challenge any attempt to limit access to justice.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/eu-official-castigates-government-over-environmental-court-costs-1.4782718

Thirdly, Ireland is a signatory to the Aarhus Convention and will fall foul of the third right i.e. Access to Justice, which again will open the govt up to being challenged in the courts.

https://ec.europa.eu/environment/aarhus/

CatInABox

Yeah, this was the approach that I thought they'd take, and it's a complete waste of time. Will fall at the EU level, if it doesn't fall beforehand.

Peregrine

All this is going to do is take up more time and resources trying to implement something that's going to result in even more court cases.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118574582#Comment_118574582

Yup, and more people getting paid. Almost like it's deliberate.

Some good points raised today during leaders questions in relation to planning delays by SD TD Jennifer Whitmore

See 21:35 to 31:00

https://www.rte.ie/player/series/leaders-questions/SI0000002690?epguid=IH000412670

Points raised by Leo were fair enough but the actions being taken to address the issues with judicial reviews are not i.e. limiting access to justice

So Brukes attempts to limit the publics access to justice is dead.

As expected several challenges were made to his plans which I'm guessing painted a pretty clear picture of how likely it was to fail.

What they are doing instead is the following

1. Setting up a separate division of the high Court specifically to deal with planning and environmental cases. Once that's done it will shine a bright light on resourcing issues if they don't staff it properly.
2. Reverting back to the 2 tier approval system (1st loop through the local council, 2nd loop through ABP). The SHD process will not be used.
3. Doing an overhaul of the planning and development acts to tidy up the legislation.

All in all this is good news. No apparent dilution of rights, from the looks of it a simplified set of legislation and dedicated resources.

The only one that has me a bit worried is the overhaul of the legislation. This will be the one to watch to see will Burke try to cut back on the right to appeal again. I hope not as even those with a basic understanding (myself included) will detect it and raise issues with it before it even gets through the Dail.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/new-court-to-deal-with-planning-issues-to-be-established-1.4864736

CatInABox

Yeah, with the amount of construction required in this country, and the propensity for Irish people to complain about everything, these new courts are going to be busy. As you say, staffing them properly is going to be key.

All in all, some sensible proposals in there. Staffing is really the key though, at all points of the process. No point in having quick courts if the councils and ABP are completely backlogged.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118992031#Comment_118992031

Absolutely

however, as regards people appealing decisions, I think its safe to say that given the volume of successful appeals against SHD projects, that the vast majority had sufficient grounds to start with.

The same can be said for challenges on environmental grounds. The amount of these that are successful is very high due to the most basic requirements not being followed.

But yeah, having appeals is not an issue if you staff the system properly. You could have an application in, reviewed, approved by council, appealed to ABP, ABP ruling, High Court appeal, all done in a matter of months if its resourced appropriately.

To be honest, a lot of these issues could be sorted right at the beginning if requirements were followed at the outset though I suspect thats where the overhaul of the legislation will be of benefit

Eamonn O Cuiv highlighting the resources issue in the dail, causing delays to planning applications

In the audio extract, you can hear Eamonn Ryan respond saying DPER are putting together a list of additional roles for ABP to flesh out the body of expertise within it. Also mentioned is the cleaning up of the legislation.

https://galwaybayfm.ie/galway-bay-fm-news-desk/o-cuiv-demands-government-tackle-scandal-of-delays-in-planning-system/

So after all the promises of a proper reform of planning laws without impacting access to justice, the govt have, in a roundabout way, took aim at rights to access justice. In all likelihood this bill will end up before the courts and will end up being quashed, resulting in it going back to square one again. To give you and idea, the bill itself is 18 pages, but the amendments run to 48 pages.

The bill in question

https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2022/39/

A good review of what the govt are it

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-40916495.html

Another very good article on it which concludes that this is going to cause more problems than fix and will likely have to be rewritten again if its not killed by the courts

https://www.thejournal.ie/judicial-review-5814746-Jul2022

Also a long twitter thread on it below by Solicitor Joe Noonan covering the period when it made it to the floor of the Dail

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1547101448634507264.html

Referenced by both, comments by the Chief Justice, Frank Clarke in 2018 when speaking about planning, the courts, delays etc

I acknowledge that we in the courts need to play our part in ensuring that our systems are as good as they can be so as to lead to timely disposition of environmental litigation. But as long as legislators both in Europe and in Leinster House produce unclear or unduly complex legislation there will undoubtedly be arguments which will go beyond the unstateable or the trivial and which will take a lot of effort to resolve. As long as that remains the case then projects are going to be held up.

The solution lies at least as much in the hands of legislators in producing greater clarity as it does in the courts and, from my perspective, lies even more on the legislative side. This is a cry which is not based on a complaint that the policy behind any particular piece of legislation is wrong. That is not a judge’s business. It is a cry for clearer legislation which will make the resolution of environmental litigation easier and therefore quicker. And a final point.

If we keep amending legislation, as we have been doing a lot in recent times, then we create constant and shifting uncertainty. It is almost inevitable that there will be some issues of interpretation with any new model. If we keep changing the model than we perpetuate the period during which the interpretation of the existing model has not settled down. 

One amendment did get killed, the one where a judicial review might be taken against ABP, ABP could, at any point (even hours before a court ruling) change their original decision to whatever they want thereby nullifying the reason for the case against them. A particularly sly move that would have severely curtailed access to justice.

Things are moving forward with the establishment of the new planning & environment branch of the high Court

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/7e26b-minister-of-state-james-browne-welcomes-government-decision-to-establish-a-dedicated-planning-and-environment-division-of-the-high-court/

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119827921#Comment_119827921

About time.

In other planning news, the ABP chairperson has now retired early, for "family reasons". Rather convenient timing, what with the report on some of his underlings coming back with a vague "no case to answer", but with no intention of actually publishing the report.

https://twitter.com/thejournal_ie/status/1588147616738643970?s=20&t=ZhLYZ4pAfj1col03HOWemg

Serious need for transparency from the next chairperson.

Burke and the Fine Gael lads won't like this. They are looking to make it prohibitively expensive as a way of discouraging challenges. The Supreme Court has just made a mess of that for them by aligning with the Aarhaus Convention criteria

The court’s interpretation renders the section consistent with the Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011 and causes it to align with the Aarhus Convention’s requirement that such proceedings are “not prohibitively expensive”, he added.

This ruling alone, will have massive impacts on Burkes plans to limit access to justice. He's been warned consistently that his plans would lose to legal challenges and this ruling is a good indication of how the courts will rule when it comes to some of his other plans

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/courtandcrime/arid-41003606.html

Full judgement

https://courts.ie/acc/alfresco/6ea188f5-326b-4bbf-8588-fa8f7ae63326/2022_IESC_43.pdf/pdf#view=fitH

Murph85

There is a vested interest at every level on planning. The vast majority of decision makers are homeowners, with a vested interest in maintaining and increasing property prices...

Burke keeps pushing with his legislation to allow him to take over the planning system from top to bottom

https://www.antaisce.org/news/independence-of-an-bord-pleanla-to-be-seriously-eroded-in-new-last-minute-planning-legislation

The Bill would hand the Minister for Housing untrammelled power and complete discretion in determining the process for appointing Board members to the State’s top planning body, with a removal of existing oversight mechanisms. In introducing these new provisions, the Bill scraps the existing Board appointments system which, while in need of some reforms, does provide for significant input from civil society, something which is crucial for the independence of the Board. The new Bill provides no safeguards or provisions for Oireachtas oversight of this new appointments process, concentrating power in the hands of one Minister. 

This is yet another eleventh-hour planning bill being rushed through the Oireachtas by the Government immediately before a recess. The Joint Oireachtas Committee on Housing was in the midst of pre-legislative scrutiny on the Bill, but the Government is now rushing the Bill to the Seanad this week, effectively circumventing the rest of the scrutiny process. In keeping with a highly disturbing pattern of rushed planning legislation in recent months and years, there has been no public consultation on the proposed changes and the Bill’s progress through the Oireachtas will be expedited, once again curtailing opportunity for scrutiny and debate.

The Bill also proposes changes to the foreshore legislation and the regulation of marine surveying, with potentially significant consequences for the interests of various marine users, including fishers and the public. It has also been reported that Government amendments will be added regarding social and affordable housing, but these have not yet been published, despite the Bill being rushed through the Seanad this week.

F me, there's literally no way this survives a legal challenge.

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/housing-planning/2022/12/12/planning-law-changes-will-prevent-resident-groups-from-taking-high-court-cases/

magicbastarder

the IT said 'scores' of developments had been delayed by resident's challenges - but IIRC, most of them won? which might suggest that the residents were correct to take them?

streamlining CPOs on derelict/vacant buildings would be welcome though.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119986535#Comment_119986535

Yup, there's very few that lost.

Also it keeps being stated that there's too many JR's but there was also no other avenue to challenge a SHD application.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119986138#Comment_119986138

From the article;

The law on the legal standing of litigants will be changed so a judicial review can be taken either by a person affected by the case or by an environmental NGO that meets certain criteria in relation to its establishment and its purposes.

So individuals and certain NGOs can still take JRs, just collections of individuals wont be able to join together to do it. I don't think there would be many legal issues with that, I would have thought that would make the system more transparent. People would have to prove the specific issue effecting them, rather than a broad we're not happy/it reduces the value of our houses type stuff.

The other interesting part from the article is;

The new laws will also allow An Bord Pleanála or a local authority correct an “error of fact or law” in its planning decision and give them the right to seek a stay on the determination of the case while doing so.

I'm not sure exactly what they mean by that but I assume it to mean that certain errors can be corrected without rejecting the entire application due to the error and requiring a new application. That would be very sensible, if that is the case.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119989966#Comment_119989966

The new laws will also allow An Bord Pleanála or a local authority correct an “error of fact or law” in its planning decision and give them the right to seek a stay on the determination of the case while doing so.

I'm not sure exactly what they mean by that but I assume it to mean that certain errors can be corrected without rejecting the entire application due to the error and requiring a new application. That would be very sensible, if that is the case

This is what caused huge grief for Burke the last time he tried this.

Basically it allows ABP etc, who are being challenged on a decision, to alter the decision or add conditions to the approval at any stage during a challenge thereby negating the point the challenge is based on. Its to dissuade challenges again.

You could spend thousands challenging a decision, only for it to be modified to address your challenge and then have the case thrown out.

This could happen years into a case, the day before a court rules etc and there would be no recourse for costs as the case would be voided.

It's the legal equivalent of moving the goalposts as the shot is being taken. You wouldn't bother playing if you could never score a goal. Maybe I'm stretching the analogy lol.

My point is, since O'Brien got in his objective has not been to fix any of the problems but rather make it as difficult as possible to take a case and make that option as unappealing as possible.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119990881#Comment_119990881

I assume that there would be rules on when a correction could be made. I think the point is to avoid the challenge progressing to the courts so would make sense to limit any correction to an early stage.

I am not overly familiar with the system, but I assume the issue it aims to rectify is that ABP can't currently accept a challengers point and retrospectively impose a condition which in theory should make everyone happy (applicant gets their permission, challenger gets condition addressing their concern imposed, ABP gets project off their desk, everybody else benefits from ABP resources getting freed up). Seems like reasonable idea to allow them to do so.

It probably does discourage challenges which are less about correcting an issue and are intended simply to delay a project in the hope it doesn't happen, but that wouldn't be a bad thing. Currently, the applicant could address the issue in a new application and get the same permission, just several months later. That is just procedural nonsense and benefits nobody.

And who is Burke?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119991796#Comment_119991796

And who is Burke?

Gah! I keep calling him Burke, I don't know why, O'Brien I meant to say, corrected my post

magicbastarder

speaking of planning delays, are there many delays to ABP decisions given all the recent shenanigans? there was one i was keeping an eye on which was due a decision monday last week (i.e. 8 days ago), but the ABP website has no update.

magicbastarder

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/housing-planning/2022/12/14/planning-bill-to-be-subject-of-green-requests-for-change/

...

Sam Russell

With regard to JR, I think that there could/should be an appeal system such that someone seeking a JR should have their case for a JR adjudicated prior to being allowed to take the JR. [I am not a lawyer so might have phrased it badly].

This would be a way of having to state the case for a JR before being allowed to go to the High Court. Now whether that would be to the HC or another judicial body is a matter to be decided. [The way the Director of Prosecutions is used to decide whether a criminal prosecution is valid to go to court].

An example would be a Residents group looking to object to a housing development across from their own housing scheme on waste land or farming land zoned for houses. They should need to give good legally backed reasons for objecting - not just because they do not like it.

So we have - LA planning authority, decision appealed to ABP, JR appeal scheme, JR before HC.

The missing bit is the time scale for each part of the process.

kieran.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119992677#Comment_119992677

I have a case for a client that was lodge late dec 2021 and it still has not been decided. From talk to ABP best case scenario is that it will be reviewed by the board in March/April 2023

Comments from MM today

https://www.irishtimes.com/politics/2022/12/14/taoiseach-warns-planning-reforms-needed-to-meet-climate-targets/

He also insisted that the proposed legislation did not contravene the Aarhus convention, a set of EU rules that requires public consultation in planning and environmental decisions. “It is Aarhus compliant – I have to stress that,” he said.

I disagree. Any attempt to restrict access to justice will be struck down so putting conditions on who can or cannot take a JR will not stand up to challenge imho

Birdnuts

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119996280#Comment_119996280

Mehole will come out with any old BS to justify FFG developer led plans to curtail citizen rights in this space

magicbastarder

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119995644#Comment_119995644

cheers, the one i'm interested in is a housing estate in north county dublin, i'm completely ignorant of whether that sort of decision would receive any priority. and the funny thing is, i know someone who's part of an informal group of locals keeping a keen eye on it.

kieran.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119998799#Comment_119998799

We I spoke with them yesterday they said they are working through them on a date basis. This may not apply if it is SHD type development.

magicbastarder

yeah, it's an SHD

https://www.pleanala.ie/en-ie/case/314360

Well, ABP is f0kd

https://www.independent.ie/news/environment/backlog-of-cases-at-an-bord-pleanala-now-stands-at-2300-the-number-it-normally-gets-through-in-a-full-year-42233568.html

I said it when it was announced, but the SHD process was always going to sink ABP and it looks like its on the verge. It got landed with the workload of 30 local councils for large developments and no extra staff to handle the workload.

Now there's a backlog of 2,300 cases of which 600 are ready to be assessed by the board while the other 1,700 not at a ready state.

There's 4 people left on the board so those 600 won't be done anytime soon

A pretty good assessment of how the recent moves by the housing minister have gutted the legal options for the public. It lays bare the avenues now open for corruption, coercion, and Ministerial interference and the constraints placed on the ability of the public to challenge unlawful decisions.

An obituary for An Bord Pleanála

https://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/commentanalysis/arid-41032205.html

veryangryman

Good.

SHD is the gift clusterfk that keeps on giving

https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/arid-41042060.html

https://twitter.com/gavinjdaly/status/1618761604472147969?s=20&t=QYC03cugtljgwPyUkM4EOA

Some context

The draft planning legislation details

https://www.independent.ie/news/environment/new-planning-laws-aimed-at-bringing-wide-ranging-reform-published-42314302.html

Govt press release

https://www.gov.ie/en/press-release/3e4e1-improved-planning-regime-takes-step-closer-with-publication-of-draft-planning-and-development-bill-2022/

The bill itself

https://www.gov.ie/en/publication/c6f60-draft-planning-and-development-bill-2022/

Some of the main changes

• Reforms include the renaming and restructuring of scandal-hit An Bord Pleanála
• New criteria will make it harder for residents' associations and community groups to seek judicial reviews of High Court planning decisions
• Mandatory timelines for planning decisions will be introduced with fines to be paid in default
• Changes to the way local authorities make county development plans and local area plans 
• Local authorities will get beefed up powers to enforce breaches of planning law and will have greater scope to use compulsory purchase orders to take over vacant and derelict sites and properties.
• A loosening of restrictions on the redevelopment of heritage buildings and protected properties will also come into effect.
• The Office of the Planning Regulator will get new powers to investigate complaints against An Bord Pleanála.
• Proceedings sought on environmental grounds will only be considered if taken by named individuals or by associations or NGOs that have been registered and active as a company for over a year and have at least ten members.
• Applicants will have to prove they are materially affected by a proposed development rather than taking proceedings on principle.

The 3 bolded points are the ones that are going to be stumbling blocks as these will potentially fall foul of the Aarhaus Convention on the basis of restricting access to justice. The previous post above, with the tweet shows the level of impact they are trying to address by limiting access.

Then we have this one rearing its head again, which got shot down the last time the Minister tried to sneak it through

• changes to Judicial Reviews (JRs) of planning decisions: there will be timelines for various steps in the JR process. ABP will be able to correct an error of fact or law in a planning decision and will be able to apply for a stay on the determination of JR proceedings whilst making such corrections. The Bill will bring clarity to the role of different parties in accessing justice. In the case of applications for JRs by certain organisations, these will be taken by an individual or individuals

In essence, this will allow ABP to drag a case right up to the point of judgement, with all the costs that this would entail for all parties, at which point they could ask the court to "hold on for a sec while we adjust our original permission, ok, we've adjusted it to account for X, the case can now be thrown out".

This is another underhanded way of limiting access to justice as it amounts to moving of the goal posts after the shot has been taken.

The rest of it seems fine in principle.

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/housing-planning/2023/01/26/internal-tensions-grow-in-green-party-over-sweeping-planning-reforms/

Some comments and further details

Green Party TD for Dublin Central Neasa Hourigan said the Bill was also not compliant with the Aarhus Convention, a key UN declaration on public participation in decision-making and environmental information which is also in EU and Irish law. She told The Irish Times that “limiting judicial reviews in the manner outlined by the Bill as published is clearly unlawful within the EU and under the Aarhus Convention”.

Dr Elaine McGoff, natural environment officer with An Taisce, said it was “hard to conceive of a more dysfunctional and inappropriate response from Government than the planning Bill published today”.“

What this Bill presents is a significant erosion of the public’s right to access justice and participate fully in the Irish planning process,” Dr McGoff said, adding that An Taisce’s view was it was “primarily an appeasement of developers and a facilitation of developer-led planning.”

Attracta Uí Bhroin, environmental law officer of the Irish Environmental Network, said the group was “extremely concerned” about the changes to judicial review.

“In fact, they’re much worse than what was outlined in December. It’s going to cause delays rather than solving problems. There will be arguments about legitimacy and the lawfulness of what is being introduced,” she said.

Vincent P Martin, the Green Party Senator and senior counsel, warned there could be “no diminution of rights of access to the courts”.

As to the impact to local communities access to justice:

The Bill sets new rules under which residents’ associations and other interested parties can take judicial reviews and stipulates that applicants for judicial review will have to demonstrate a “sufficient interest”, with NGOs, residents’ groups or other similar bodies expected to be incorporated as a company, have protection of the environment as part of its corporate constitution, have at least 10 members and to have passed a resolution authorising the bringing of proceedings.

Residents’ groups can still take proceedings but if they do not comply with these rules, they will have to sue individually or collectively under their own names.

If they do get this passed, it'll be killed in the Supreme or EU courts

Further comment and analysis

https://www.independent.ie/news/environment/key-details-still-absent-from-new-planning-laws-despite-looming-summer-deadline-42315165.html

More judges to be appointed to the courts to try assist with the backlog of cases will be in the first tranche (24) broken out as follows

• Court of Appeal to increase from 16 to 18
• High Court increases from 45 to 51
• Circuit Court increase from 38 to 46 and
• District Court increase from 64 to 72

A second tranche of 20 appointments will happen......sometime in the future, maybe. That will be broken out as follows

• High Court gets an additional 6
• Circuit Court gets an additional 6
• District Court an additional 6
• and the Court of Appeal would get an extra 2

This will take use from 173 to 217 but this still leaves wayyyyy behind the norm in Europe

https://www.rte.ie/news/courts/2023/0224/1358529-judges-appointed/

Statistics published last year by the European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice, found that Ireland has the lowest number of judges per head of population. It found Ireland had 3.27 judges per 100,000 people in 2020, below the European average of 17.6 judges.

The Planning Court will also be born out of these appointments

https://www.friendsoftheirishenvironment.org/news-archive/judge-numbers-to-be-increased-and-new-planning-court-to-be-established

Incidentally further concerns were raised about restricting access to justice and Irelands non-compliance to the Aarhaus Convention, this time by the Irish Planning Institute in a presentation to an Oireachtas committee 

Meanwhile, a leading Oireachtas committee heard concerns about resourcing and about communities' access to justice under the draft planning legislation.

Gavin Lawlor of the Irish Planning Institute told the Oireachtas housing committee that the bill in its current form would limit those who can apply for a judicial review and would exclude residents' association from directly bringing High Court challenges (though they could be taken in the name of an individual directly impacted).

This reduction in actors who can appeal through the courts is problematic for the Irish Planning Institute, Mr Lawlor said. “We do believe it will reduce who has access to the law. We have concerns regarding equality of people of different means having equal access to the law.

“We have concern over the Arhaus convention [an international agreement that gives people the right to access justice on environmental matters, information about the environment and promotes public participation in decision-making].”

Its been flagged now by so many different groups that if the govt do plough ahead, it will most certainly end up in the courts and I can see the EU getting involved to strike it down. They don't take interference with the judicial system lightly as evidenced by them withholding billions from Poland over their shenanigans

Further concerns raised at an Oireachtas committee today about the plans to limit access to justice, this time by the Law Society of Ireland

https://twitter.com/LawSocIreland/status/1632708790419173376

Full statement here

https://www.lawsociety.ie/news/Media/Press-Releases/law-society-raises-questions-about-impact-of-planning-law-reform-on-citizens-rights/?filters=&location=&category=&area=

Outside of the construction lobby, I don't know of a single body within the state supporting these restrictions on the access to justice.