EU
European Parliament adopts position on proposed one substance, one assessment package
The package proposes to streamline safety assessments of chemicals across EU legislation by optimising the work of EU agencies involved and creating a common data platform on chemicals. The platform would be managed by the European Chemicals Agency to consolidate data on chemicals collected under EU law in one location, and serve as a one-stop-shop for access to chemicals information (including, for example, data on hazards, emissions, use, sustainability and ongoing regulatory processes). The platform would also contain data on the levels of chemicals found in people. Negotiations between the EU Parliament and Council on the final text of the legislation will now commence.
European Parliament adopts resolution calling for faster permitting of clean energy projects to support energy-intensive industries
The resolution recognises the key role held by energy-intensive industries (such as chemicals, steel and cement) in the European economy. It states that these industries are crucial for the EU's strategic autonomy and competitiveness, as well as for decarbonisation. However, unnecessary regulatory burdens and lengthy permitting procedures undermine the business case for investing in decarbonisation in Europe.
The European Parliament is calling on Member States to accelerate permitting and licensing processes for clean energy projects, ensuring administrative capacity, and calling on the Commission to develop solutions for speeding up decarbonisation projects beyond the concept of overriding public interest. The President has been instructed to forward this resolution to the EU Commission and Council, as well as the governments and parliaments of Member States.
European Commission proposes amendments to the EU's Cohesion Policy
The EU's Cohesion Policy provides financing to projects in the EU where gross domestic product per capita is below the EU average to minimise gaps between countries and between different regions in the same country. The current programming period (2021-2027) has a budget of €392 billion. The Commission has suggested revisions to the policy to improve support for EU competitiveness and decarbonisation, defence and security, affordable housing, water resilience and the energy transition. This is part of a mid-term review process.
The proposed amendments will be discussed by the European Parliament and the Council. Member States will be invited to reprogramme part of their 2021-2027 cohesion funds to new investments in the context of this review. Ireland's position on the future of the Cohesion Policy post-2027 was published in March 2025, and is available here.
EU JUDGMENT
The CJEU rules on competent authorities' obligations regarding third party submissions on environmental assessments
The High Court referred four questions to the CJEU in relation to a challenge against the adequacy of an environmental impact assessment screening ("EIA screening") carried out for a proposed strategic housing development in County Cork.
The CJEU ruled that where, following an EIA screening, a third party provides the competent authority with objective evidence regarding potential significant effects of a project on the environment, in particular on a species protected under the Habitats Directive, that authority must ask the developer to provide it with additional information and take that information into account before deciding whether or not an EIA is required. However, this obligation does not apply where the competent authority can rule out the possibility that the project is likely to have significant effects on the environment on the basis of objective evidence. In this case, the authority may decide that an EIA is not necessary without being required to ask the developer to provide additional information.
DOMESTIC UPDATES
The Government approves the Revised National Planning Framework
The Government approved the Revised National Planning Framework (the "Revised NPF") on 8 April 2025. Following the approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas, the Revised NPF will replace the existing NPF, which was published in 2018. The Revised NPF is the Government's strategic plan for the development of Ireland to 2040. Once approved, it will provide the basis for new regional strategies and local authority development plans.
Separately, funding for each local authority has been committed over a five year period for the implementation of Local Authority Climate Action Plans. Almost €14 million has been paid out to date.
The Government approves the general scheme of the Industrial Development (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025
The Bill would amend the IDA and Enterprise Ireland's grant making powers by introducing a grant for Environmental Protection. Grants may be given to undertakings which exceed mandatory EU environmental protection standards in a wide range of areas, such as pollution prevention, actions to mitigate climate change, actions to lead to the more efficient use of natural resources, including energy-saving measures, and the use of renewable energy.
DOMESTIC CASE LAW
Supreme Court grants leave to appeal High Court decision concerning requirement for site-specific conservation objectives in Special Protection Areas
The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal a High Court decision concerning a challenge to decisions of An Bord Pleanála (the "Board") in respect of the construction of a 4.5km road project in County Louth. The proposed route passes through a Special Protection Area ("SPA"). The Board's inspector conducted an appropriate assessment ("AA") screening and concluded that an AA was not required. However, no site-specific conservation objectives were in place for a potentially impacted SPA. The applicant argued that valid conservation objectives are required for the Board to carry out a valid AA screening. The Supreme Court determined that the question is one of general public importance as it could affect a very large number of development projects.
The Court noted the ongoing Court of Appeal reference to the Court of Justice ("CJEU") on what is effectively the same point (Power v An Board Pleanála [2024] IECA 295), which relates to a renewable energy development. The outcome of Power will be awaited before a hearing in this case is arranged. The Court recorded its disappointment that a request that the CJEU deal with Power on an expedited basis was refused.
Court of Appeal refers questions on environmental-assessment requirements for strategic policy documents to the CJEU
Friends of the Irish Environment CLG challenged the Government's strategy for the Agri-food sector, known as Food Vision 2030 (the "Strategy"). Although a strategic environmental assessment ("SEA") and an AA were carried out prior to its adoption, the appellant argued that both were deficient. Regarding SEA, the Court found that the Strategy is not a "plan or programme" under the SEA Directive. It lacks a statutory basis and is not required by legislative, regulatory or administrative provisions.
Although Justice Butler was minded to agree with the trial judge that the Strategy is a type of plan which, in practical terms, is incapable of being the subject of a meaningful AA, she concluded that the position is not clear cut. Three questions will be referred to the CJEU. In summary, these concern:
- whether a high-level strategy policy may be deemed a "plan or project" under article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive,
- if the answer is yes, does this remain the case where the plan or programme does not contain measures of adequate specificity to be quantified and assessed, and where it is not possible to identify any specific Natura 2000 sites which might be affected by its implementation to enable an assessment by reference to the sites' specific conservation measures, and
- if the answer is yes, is it sufficient for an AA of such a policy to identify generally the environmental risks posed by activities within the sector covered by the policy and the general effects those activities might have on protected habitat types and species in Natura 2000 sites, without identifying specific risks that might impact upon individually identified sites.
High Court applies doctrine of harmless error in challenge against decision by An Board Pleanála
This case concerns a challenge against a grant of permission by the Board for a data centre and associated structures in Co. Clare. The inspector's report stated that no bat roosts were found during her inspection. This overlooked the fact that one roost was identified in a barn. The Court set out case law establishing the main principles of the doctrine of harmless error, including that a decision should not be quashed for harmless error which did not materially affect the result. The determination of whether an error would have affected the result is one for the Court.
Information on the single roost was available in the EIAR, to which the applicants had access. Therefore, public participation was not compromised by the omission in the inspector's report. The applicants did not make any submission on the roost during the application process, nor did they challenge the EIAR's conclusion of no significant residual impacts on bats.
The Court concluded on the facts that the inspector's error was not material, noting that the problem falls into the category of harmless error: "something that one can be satisfied about as not making a difference, to a level that excludes all reasonable doubt."
High Court stresses strict criteria to obtain leave to appeal High Court decision
The applicant failed to obtain an order of certiorari against the grant of permission for a windfarm in the High Court and sought leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. In refusing leave, the Court listed and considered the elements required for leave to be granted. The Court stated that the point must properly arise, that is, the question must arise on the facts of the case and must actually have been argued by the applicant in the initial challenge. The point must be one of law, and the point of law must be of public importance. The appellant must establish that the public importance is exceptional. Additionally, an appeal must be in the public interest.
On the question of whether the appeal was in the public interest, the Court noted that the planning application was made on 17 February 2020. Justice Humphreys considered that in the context of the climate emergency, or indeed in any commercial context, further delay would cause irremediable prejudice that could not be compensated for in costs. The Court dismissed the application stating that, ultimately, it was an attempt to revisit matters already covered by past caselaw.
High Court refuses application to compel Meath County Council to commence the process of making a Local Area Plan for East Meath
The applicant is a non-profit organisation which sought an order of mandamus to compel Meath County Council to make a Local Area Plan ("LAP") for an area in East Meath. The LAP for the area expired in October 2020, and a further LAP has not been made. The Council accepted that it is in breach of its statutory duties in this regard. The Court acknowledged the "stark" loss of experienced staff by the Council and its recruitment failures. Arguments raised by the Council in relation to difficulties caused by new laws (such as the residential zoned land tax and the futility of making a new LAP prior to the commencement of the Planning and Development Act 2024) were rejected.
The Court considered that it should be very slow to intervene to direct the Council on how to allocate its scarce resources. The Court also considered that proper planning is covered by Meath's County Development Plan, although not to the extent and degree envisaged by the planning regime. The Court concluded that an order of mandamus compelling the preparation of a LAP for one part of the county, to the exclusion of the rest of the county, would be unjust. The application for mandamus was refused.
This article contains a general summary of developments and is not a complete or definitive statement of the law. Specific legal advice should be obtained where appropriate.
