Council's claim on visitors' centre is upheld

In a judgment clarifying the power of the courts in relation to planning permissions, the Supreme Court has upheld a claim by…

In a judgment clarifying the power of the courts in relation to planning permissions, the Supreme Court has upheld a claim by Donegal County Council that the High Court had no jurisdiction to grant a declaration as to what activities may be carried on at a visitors' centre at an ancient monument, Grianan an Aileach, near Burt.

The High Court had held the operators of the centre might use it for cultural and inter-cultural activities involving the service of food and drink but could not use it for non-cultural activities, weddings or as a nightclub.

Yesterday, the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Keane, agreed with the council that the High Court had no jurisdiction to grant such a declaration to Grianan an Aileach Interpretative Centre Company Limited (GAICC).

The issues the court was asked to address in the case were properly matters for the planning authority - Donegal County Council - and An Bord Pleanála, Mr Justice Keane said.

READ SOME MORE

He rejected the High Court's view that it was entitled to grant a declaration as to the true meaning of the planning permission granted to the interpretative centre.

The case arose following a dispute between the council and Grianan an Aileach over the use of the centre.

They had secured planning permission on December 17th, 1998, for a visitors' centre at a disused church near Grianan an Aileach, at Speenogue, Burt.

The plans lodged with the planning application showed a building described as the "existing visitors' centre" and a number of other buildings, a "centre of intercultural activities", a "nature exhibition" and an "audio-visual theatre".

The permission was to cease to have effect after five years in relation to any part of the development not completed within that time.

The judge said the development was not fully complete as part of the audio visual theatre and most of a history exhibition area had not been built. Grianan an Aileach had also secured a restaurant and public dancing licence for the premises.

The dispute with the council first arose in March 2002 when the company forwarded a list of events which it intended to hold that year.

These included celebrations of various festivals, including Easter, Bealtaine, the summer solstice, themed banquets, a celebration of Queen Elizabeth's golden jubilee and an "open house with session musicians".

The council said it considered the premises to be primarily a visitors' centre for tourists to interpret the monument and adjoining woodlands.

While it accepted there might be banqueting nights on special occasions, it believed the proposed activities related to regular weekly functions not envisaged by the permission.

Grianan an Aileach expressed concern that the council's attitude was creating serious financial problems for it and it was being threatened with the withdrawal of funding by Bord Fáilte.

In March 2003, it initiated High Court proceedings seeking declarations that the premises might be used for a range of activities, including nights of intercultural activities with appropriate food served.

The council opposed the proceedings.

The High Court construed the planning permission as authorising certain uses of the premises, including for cultural activities and the service of food and drink ancillary to such activities. The court found the permission prohibited the centre's use for non-cultural activities, weddings or as a nightclub.

Giving the Supreme Court judgment overturning that decision, Mr Justice Keane, with Mr Justice Murray and Ms Justice McGuinness, said the issue between the council and Grianan an Aileach was whether the proposed uses of the centre were authorised by the planning permission.

Although the issue had arisen in that form, he was satisfied that the tribunal which would determine that issue would have to decide whether what was being proposed would constitute "a material change" in the use of the premises, not authorised by the permission.

In order to decide whether planning permission was required in this case, the matter of whether the proposed uses would constitute "a development" had to be decided.

The Planning and Development Act 2000 empowered the planning authority - in this case the council - and An Bord Pleanála to determine that issue.

Mary Carolan

Mary Carolan

Mary Carolan is the Legal Affairs Correspondent of the Irish Times