A proprietor of a timber homes, fencing and garden shed business ignored a court ruling that he had no planning permission for a factory and continued to add buildings including those in a building display area, Judge Patrick McCartan said at Wicklow Circuit Court yesterday.
Approving an application from Wicklow County Council for enforcement orders against Abwood Homes and Forest Fencing Ltd, Judge McCartan recalled that he had ruled last February that an initial factory development off the N11 at Timore, Ashford, had been developed without planning approval.
Since that ruling, he noted that work at the site had not stopped and that additional buildings had been erected.
Remarking that the principal of both Abwood and the fencing company, Mr George Smullen, had "taken the decision to ignore the judgment of the court", Judge McCartan said the development was substantial. He said in the past traffic on the N11 "may have noticed a modest development on a corner site".
However following the building of the Ashford and Rathnew bypass, the businesses had moved to a new site across the road and "one cannot but observe Abwood open to the world.
"Since February when judgment was given one would wonder what is going on. There seems to be no end to what is occurring there."
Noting that his initial enforcement orders granted last February were under appeal to the High Court, Judge McCartan commented that a prudent developer might have held his hand pending the ruling of the appeal court, "but in this case the developer has chosen not to do so".
Judge McCartan told Mr John Gibbons SC, for the developer, that he was prepared to put a stay on the orders pending the outcome of the High Court case, but only if the developer would give undertakings to the court which would be acceptable to Wicklow County Council.
After an adjournment, Mr Gibbons said Mr Smullen and the businesses were prepared to give undertakings to the court if they were allowed to carry on certain remedial and planting works at the site. However Mr Paul Murray BL said this was not acceptable to the council and the only undertaking the council would find acceptable was that all work would stop.
Judge McCartan said he was disinclined to grant any stay on the order adding that in the event of an appeal of yesterday's judgment, the High Court may find a date in which to hear both appeals.
Earlier, Mr Gibbons had told the court that the defendants maintained that they had planning permission "in default" because, he maintained, the council had not responded to the planning applicant within the specified time frame.
Judge McCartan said he was satisfied the manager's order was in accordance with the regulations and that the council had carried out its role and duties correctly.