Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Planning for the N6 Galway City Outer Bypass was approved in 2008 - but has been appealed to the Supreme Court due to its environmental impact. National Roads Authority

ECJ ruling casts doubt on planning permission for Galway bypass

The EU’s top court hands a major boost to opponents to the N6 bypass around Galway, ahead of a final Supreme Court ruling.

THE EUROPEAN UNION’S highest court has sided with objectors to the construction of a bypass around Galway city – suggesting that An Bord Pleanála had an incorrect interpretation of environmental law when it granted permission for the project.

The European Court of Justice says planning permission cannot be granted for projects that “adversely affect the integrity of that site” if they stop the site from being to act as a protected priority natural habitat.

The ruling, on questions referred to it by the Supreme Court of Ireland, throw the future of the N6 Galway City Outer Bypass into jeopardy – and may now result in the plans having to be dramatically scaled back or abandoned.

An Bord Pleanála approved planning permission for the 12 kilometre road in 2008. Part of the road was planned to cross a designated ‘site of Community importance’ at Lough Corrib, which hosts 14 different habitats protected under the EU habitats directive.

When approving planning permission, An Bord Pleanála acknowledged that the road would have “a localised severe impact” on the areas in Lough Corrib, it would not “have unacceptable effects for on the environment”.

The areas in Lough Corrib had not been formally included in the European Commission’s list of protected areas at the time, however, although the Irish government had submitted them to the European Commission for inclusion in the list by that time.

Approval appealed to High Court and onward

Environmental campaigner Peter Sweetman appealed the case to the High Court and then to the Supreme Court, which sent questions to the ECJ seeking clarification on the extent of European law.

The ECJ this morning ruled that national authorities could not “authorise interventions where there is a risk of lasting harm to the ecological characteristics of sites which host priority natural habitat types” such as those listed in the EU habitats directive.

“That would particularly be so where there is a risk that an intervention of a particular kind will bring about the disappearance or the partial and irreparable destruction of a priority natural habitat type present on the site concerned,” it said.

The court said that the construction of the Galway bypass through the Lough Corrib site would destroy limestone pavement which could not be replaced.

“The conservation objective thus corresponds to maintenance at a favourable conservation status of that site’s constitutive characteristics, namely the presence of limestone pavement,” it ruled.

The matter will now be returned to the Irish Supreme Court, which could still opt to approve the plans on the “imperative reason of overriding public interest”.

Development of the project – which was funded under EU programmes from 2000 to 2006 – remains suspended.

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
66 Comments
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Catherine Handley
    Favourite Catherine Handley
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 4:48 PM

    I received my email from apple requesting my iPod Nano and have gone through the steps for a replacement. I’m an apple nerd anyway but I am very impressed that they will replace my iPod that is 6 years old!

    41
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute John Needham
    Favourite John Needham
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 5:01 PM

    They dont really have much choice, if there was a dangerous fault in the original device they are still responsible.

    16
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Brian Kelleher
    Favourite Brian Kelleher
    Report
    Nov 21st 2011, 9:51 PM

    So you’re happy that it only took them six years to admit fault and recall a product that’s known to burst into flames? Yeah, woo! Go Apple!

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Seán Kearns
    Favourite Seán Kearns
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 5:39 PM

    Anyone got a clue as to what type of replacement we’d be getting? And I’m gonna be without my iPod for a few weeks now because that was my only one since my last one got stolen.

    4
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Aaron Hastings
    Favourite Aaron Hastings
    Report
    Nov 17th 2011, 10:18 AM

    The replacement will be another first gen apparently. Someone on another site called Apple and that’s what he was told.

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Cormac Flanagan
    Favourite Cormac Flanagan
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 5:36 PM

    How do I go about sending mine back does anyone know.

    4
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Seán Kearns
    Favourite Seán Kearns
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 5:37 PM

    There’s a link there in the article i think. You’ll have to create an apple id if you haven’t one already.

    3
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Paul Gallagher
    Favourite Paul Gallagher
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 8:02 PM

    Old

    2
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Graham Mace
    Favourite Graham Mace
    Report
    Nov 16th 2011, 6:42 PM

    That’s what they mean by “assault and battery” is it? More like “arson and battery”. I had a Apple replacement battery for my G4 MacBook . Seems batteries are a bit of a problem for Apple. Fair play to Apple, they do own up if they’ve sold you a dud but it can’t help the brand. A lot of people think it won’t last now Steve Jobs is gone,

    2
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Keith Tracey
    Favourite Keith Tracey
    Report
    Nov 17th 2011, 3:29 AM

    Strange that out of the 60 million that sold six years ago there hasn’t been any reports of iPod nanos causing any fires yet! Still better safe than sorry apple!

    1
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds