This is an account of how the C50-09 ECJ ruling was dealt with by ABP, high Court and European Commission.

2016-266 annex (1)


This is an account of how the C50-09 ECJ ruling was dealt with by ABP, high Court and European Commission.

DCC sends EIS re Moville/Greencastle WWTP to ABP ON 23 – 10 – 2008

ECJ ruling C50-09 came in on 3 -03 – 2011 having found Ireland guilty of not properly transposing parts of the EIA directive.

Five months later ABP gave planning permission to the Moville/Greencastle WWTP on 12 – 08 – 2011 maintaining C50-09 ruling did not apply.

On 30th Sep 2012, Min of Env Phil Hogan ( on behalf of Irish Govt. ) signed off that Irish legislation was now compliant with C50-09 and this was accepted by Eur. Commission —– they were both wrong.

European Commission, by wrongfully accepting the compliance statement from Irish Govt., on Sep 2012, gave the green light to the High Court on Aug 2013 that the C50-09 ruling did not apply, could be ignored and that the decision of ABP would be upheld.

This lack of knowledge has now been accepted by the following statement from Mr Paul Speight, European Commission, in his letter to me on 28-04-2016 where he states in the third paragraph

” Since the relevant rules for waste water discharge licensing were not mentioned in the Courts judgement, ( C50-09 ECJ of 3-03-2011 ) the Commission was not aware at that time that they needed to be amended ”

Point is, when ABP gave planning in Aug 2011 they were operating on the basis ‘ of their assessment ‘ that the clarified ECJ ruling C50-09 did not apply to our case. As it turns out now their ‘assessment ‘ was wrong.

The same point applies to the decision of the High Court on its Judicial Review decision on Aug 2013 albeit they had knowledge of the European Commission’s acceptance of Min. Hogan’s compliance statement of Sep 2012 regarding the C50-09 ECJ ruling.

It was only in Mar 2015 when we pointed out that Irish law was still not compliant with the requirements of article 76 of C50-09 of 03-03-2011 that ABP, the Irish Govt and European Commission accepted the legislation needed to be amended. ( see attached Dept letter to European Commission with draft amended Legislation )

The defective legislation is now being amended

Fundamentally this means that, by ignoring the clarified requirements of the ECJ C50-09 ruling, the planning permission given by ABP on 12-08-2011 was given under defective legislation.

Also, the same point applies to the High Court’s Judicial Review ruling of 26-08-2013 which upheld the ABP decision.

Question is — Where does that leave the planning decision given by ABP and upheld by the High Court on Judicial Review.

Also, where does this leave the European Commission, who failed to recognise that the Irish Govt was not compliant with the clarified requirements of the C50-09 Judgement of the ECJ, when it wrongfully accepted Minister Hogan’s communication of compliance on 30th Sep 2012

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>