Residents Denied Appeal Against Projected M28 Highway In Cork

Residents who lost a legal challenge to An Bord Pleanala’s granting of approval for a 14 km long M28 motorway between Cork and Ringaskiddy have been told that they cannot file an appeal.

Superior Court Judge Michael MacGrath denied the umbrella group representing local residents, the M28 Steering Group, permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

The judge ruled that he was not satisfied that the M28 Steering Group had raised issues of law of exceptional public importance.

They had requested permission to appeal under section 50 of the Planning and Development Act, which allows an appeal if the case involves issues of law of exceptional public importance and is in the public interest.

Last December, the High Court dismissed the challenge to An Bord Pleanala’s June 2018 decision to grant approval for the 14 km long M28 motorway between Cork and Ringaskiddy.

Judge Michael MacGrath also concluded that he was not satisfied that it had been established that the court should refer the suggested questions to Europe and the CJEU.

The framed questions, the judge said, are based on continued maintenance by the M28 Steering Group that the project under consideration is the road and quarry scheme.

The court, he said, had found that the project is the road scheme and, in the circumstances, granting the request for a reference to Europe would imply asking the CJEU to consider an issue that the High Court has concluded is not necessary for the determination. of the problems in the case.

Mr. Justice MacGrath was also not satisfied that it was desirable in the public interest that a certificate be issued authorizing an appeal.

Last December, the High Court said it was not convinced that An Bord Pleanala had not properly evaluated the highway project before making its decision.

The M28 Steering Group, Judge MacGrath said on that occasion, had ruled in what was a difficult case to unload the burden of proof required that would allow the court to grant the reparations it seeks and therefore must dismiss the case. .

The group had claimed that the board’s decision was wrong for reasons including that the application for a permit to build the road was premature, incomplete and did not meet the requirements of national and European legislation.

He also argued that the board did not consider the entire project or the cumulative effects of the proposed development.

They claimed that the material to be used as part of the construction of the new highway will be extracted from a disused quarry, known as the Raffeen Quarry, located along the route.

The group said the quarry is ecologically important and is home to a wide variety of protected flora and fauna. A proper evaluation of the proposed road works at the quarry has not been carried out, the group said.

The action was rejected by the board. He said the project had been properly evaluated before the decision to grant planning permission was granted.

The Cork City Council, party to the notice of action, submitted to the court that a proper assessment had been carried out regarding the proposed project.