The Supreme Court has rejected a final attempt by Ryanair to stop the construction of a proposed €200 million cargo underpass at Dublin Airport.
In February, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys dismissed the airline’s challenge to An Bord Pleanála’s decision to approve the Dublin Airport Authority’s (DAA) planned 1.1km tunnel, which is to run beneath the “crosswind” runway.
The judge subsequently refused Ryanair permission to appeal that ruling to the Court of Appeal.
The Supreme Court this week said it would not allow Ryanair to challenge Mr Justice Humphreys’ judgment in a leapfrog appeal, after deciding its case did not meet the threshold required for the granting of permission to appeal.
RM Block
The Supreme Court will only hear appeals involving matters it deems to be of general public importance, or if it deems the hearing of an appeal is in the interest of justice.
The court said the interests of justice weighed “significantly against” granting permission to Ryanair to appeal, given the proposed underpass is safety-related.
Ryanair’s leave for appeal application arose from what it said was An Bord Pleanála’s erroneous interpretation of the Dublin Airport Local Area Plan (LAP) in considering DAA’s planning application for the underpass.
Ryanair argued that determining whether material legal errors made by An Bord Pleanála in the interpretation or understanding of a relevant LAP in coming to a planning decision can be grounds to quash such a decision is an issue of general public importance.
“The panel is not satisfied that the issue identified by Ryanair as the issue of general public importance justifying the grant of leave ... properly arises on the facts here,” a three-judge Supreme Court panel wrote.
In the High Court proceedings, Ryanair argued An Bord Pleanála did not recognise that the proposed development is inconsistent with the Dublin Airport Local Area Plan, as it requires the loss of two aircraft stands.
While Mr Justice Humphreys said he tended to agree with parts of the Ryanair’s argument on this point, he said the airline relied on Section 37(2) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 in making this argument, a subsection that he said does not apply to cases of material contravention of local area plans.
Mr Justice Humphreys had held that An Bord Pleanála had correctly interpreted the relevant Local Area Plan in granting permission to DAA.
The underpass is needed to improve access and safety on the airfield and to facilitate segregation of aircraft and ground vehicles, according to DAA.
