Couple Ordered to Demolish House - any update?

I'm guessing/estimating a general timeframe. Funnily enough, I don't have access to the schedules of Meath County Council, nor can I anticipate if/how the Murrays may seek to challenge the decision further or how many courts they may drag such a challenge through, or how quickly those courts may rule on it or decide not to permit those challenges at all.

The only thing I can say with any relative degree of certainty is that Meath County Council will not set a precedent and allow the Murrays to keep the house, or to take control of the house themselves to repurpose it for another use. That will not happen.

Considering the Council first issued enforcement proceedings against the property back in 2007, the fact the house is almost now 20 years old is irrelevant. The only reason it's been taking so long is the Murrays constantly dragging it back through the courts, and they have now likely run out of legitimate reasons to do so.

But to flip your own argument; if any Council had previously decided not to knock down a family home after 20 years even though every court ruled that they could or should, then a precedent for a Council to make such a decision would have been set and the Murrays could have used that precedent to argue that Meath County Council should grant them the same decision (as all councils are ultimately subject to the same planning and development legislations and regulations). But that has not happened.

A comparable precedent does not need to have been set in this case as the decisions made are within existing legislation and regulations already in place to cover such a situation, namely that the possible enforcement decisions for unauthorised development includes demolition of the structure. It being a family home of 20 years is irrelevant. Every single level of the relevant courts in Ireland have already ruled that the decision made by the Council is correct and enforceable.

In fairness, the authorities have been trying to do what's right. They've been trying to knock it down for 15+ years. It's the Murrays who have abused the system by bringing so many legal challenges and revised planning applications which they know won't be granted. They may find ways to continue to do so, but I think the Supreme Court not even hearing their latest appeal and basically refusing to hear any further appeals has meant the Murrays have run out of road.

The Council want the building demolished and done with, it's by far the simplest and best resolution for them.

I would imagine they would have to give the Murrays a reasonable timeframe (say 6 months) to find alternative accommodation (or to engage with the Council regarding emergency accommodation) and move their stuff out of the house, at which point anything remaining in the house would be destroyed/discarded, and if the Murrays had not left the house by that stage and were impeding the demolition, they would then be subject to criminal proceedings including fines and/or imprisonment.

It mattered a bit, but not a lot. Even if they built the same size as they had been refused planning for, the reason for refusal was the sterilisation of the land. I've said before that Councils will generally try to grant retention permission for something which could reasonably have been granted planning permission or which could be modified to be more aligned with what could have been granted planning.

In this case, no house would have been granted planning permission on that site, and they built one anyway. Yes, building twice as big lost them any degree of sympathy and demonstrated how they just elected to fully and flagrantly ignore the Council's decision, but the outcome would always have been the same; the Council would not permit a house to be built on that land, so any unauthorised house built there would have to be demolished.