A GROUP OF traders who argue that Dublin City Council acted beyond its powers in adopting traffic bans on private vehicles have been granted leave to challenge the measures by way of judicial review.

Dublin City Centre Traders Alliance, led by solicitor Noel Smyth, is seeking a judicial review of the effects of traffic calming measures and works on several Liffey quays put into place by respondents Dublin City Council and the National Transport Authority (NTA) last August.

The alliance includes the owners of city centre car parks, including those connected to Brown Thomas, Arnotts and the Jervis Shopping Centre and counts the Restaurants Association of Ireland and Louis Copeland among their members.

By way of judicial review, the alliance seeks to challenge traffic changes and restrictions on the use of private vehicles at O’Connell Bridge, Bachelor’s Walk, Eden Quay, Aston Quay, Burgh Quay and Fleet Street.

Private traffic is not permitted to drive on a specific stretch of the quays on either side of O’Connell Bridge from 7am to 7pm to encourage the use of public transport and cycling.

The transport plan adopted has a stated aim to reduce congestion by discouraging traffic “that has no destination in the city”.

Smyth submits in his papers that a July 2024 report commissioned by the traders predicts that the adoption of the transport plan would have an overall negative impact of €390 million.

The traders’ report predicts a decrease in retail spending in the year 2028 of €141 million and a loss of over 6,000 jobs, leading to the total “adverse monetary impact” of €390 million.

In the grounding statement seeking judicial review, the traders seek an order quashing the July 2024 adoption – the first order – of the ‘Dublin City Centre Transport Plan’ by the respondents.

The traders also claim the adoption of the plan as a ‘joint plan’ between the council and the NTA is “invalid”. They further claim the council’s chief executive was “not empowered” to make the order [adopting the transport plan] because it “exceeded” the terms of the Dublin City Council Development Plan 2022-2028.

The adoption order was also “invalid and made in breach of fair procedures and natural justice”, the traders claim.

The group are also seeking a quashing of what they submit are the council’s second and third “invalid” orders, relating to the implementation of the traffic management changes and the granting of approval for signage for traffic calming measures along the north and south quays.

It is submitted that the council acted ‘ultra vires’ – beyond its powers – and erred in law in ordering the implementation of the traffic calming measures without an environmental impact assessment being carried out.

In Smyth’s affidavit, it is also claimed that a questionnaire, provided during an 11-week public consultation that closed on 1 December 2023 was “biased” and designed to “prompt answers in support of the respondent’s draft plan”.

The traders further claim that the respondents approached the adoption of the transport plan “with a closed mind” and followed a process “designed to achieve a pre-ordained outcome”.

When granting permission for the review at the High Court this week, Justice Richard Humphreys adjourned the matter to 13 January for what counsel for the traders, Eamon Galligan SC, called “quite a complex matter”.