The High Court has resumed hearing a challenge by South Dublin County Council to the carrying out of certain development works at Weston Aerodrome, near Lucan, Co Dublin.
The aerodrome was bought by property developer Jim Mansfield early last year for some €12.7 million. The council claims certain works carried out on the property required permission which was not secured. However, Mr Mansfield claims the works constitute exempted development.
In judicial review proceedings, the council is seeking a number of orders against Fallowvale Limited and Weston Limited, two companies of which Mr Mansfield is a director. Among the orders sought is one restraining all unauthorised development on lands at Weston Aerodrome.
Yesterday, as the case was due to resume before Mr Justice McKechnie, Mr James Macken SC, for the companies, said his clients had secured a notification of a grant of permission regarding the relocation of the airport from its present location - which was the subject of the legal proceedings - to an area on the same site but further to the west. What was at issue in the action was whether the terminal stayed where it was or was relocated.
He recalled the court had been informed at the outset of the proceedings that the companies' application for permission to reconfigure Weston Aerodrome was then in being. The application sought, among other things, to relocate hangars.
He said the notification of a grant of permission had been made just this week, on April 8th. He suggested the current proceedings be adjourned to see whether there would be an appeal against the notification.
He was aware some local residents had objected to the planning application. If there was an appeal, he estimated it would take up to eight months for that to be determined.
Mr Dermot Flanagan SC, for the council, said what had been received was a notification of a decision to grant permission and that was neutral regarding the matters before the court.
Counsel suggested the court was being asked to adjourn the proceedings indefinitely until the statutory process took its course. That was "not appropriate".
Mr Justice McKechnie said he would adjourn for a short time to see if the parties could come to a practical solution. Unless there was agreement, the case would resume. When the court reconvened, the judge was told the case was proceeding.
The hearing continues today.