High Court has dismissed an application for an injunction reversing Fingal Co Council decision to pedestrianise part of Malahide Village in North Co Dublin
The High Court has dismissed an application for an injunction reversing Fingal Co Council decision to pedestrianise part of Malahide Village in North Co Dublin.
In a ruling on Wednesday Mr Justice Charles Meenan said that company director Nicola Byrne had not satisfied the court that her case was strong enough to allow the court grant the injunction sought.
The judge adjourned her main challenge against the council's decision to a date in October.
Last June the High Court granted Ms Byrne permission to challenge the council's decision to pedestrianise New Street, in Malahide, which commenced over the June Bank Holiday weekend.
Temporary
The council says the measures arise out of the Covid-19 pandemic and are temporary in nature, in order to aid and facilitate outdoor dining, and social distancing for the summer of 2021.
The street had previously been pedestrianised between June and November 2020. It denies any wrong doing.
Ms Byrne, who lives in nearby Old Street, Malahide claims that the council's decision is flawed and should be set aside as it lacks the legal authority to implement the development.
As part of her action, she sought various orders including injunctions stopping the council from pedestrianising the street, and diverting traffic in Malahide, and reserving all steps it has taken in these regards.
Injunctions
If granted the injunctions would remain in place until her full judicial review action has been determined by the court.
The injunctions were sought as she claims that her main action may not be heard this year.
If that proved to be the case, she claimed that her action may become moot, or pointless , because the justification for the pedestrianisation will have expired.
She claims that in such a scenario the council would have achieved its aims, without having to comply with various legal requirements.
Fingal County Council had opposed the injunction application.
Represented by James Doherty SC the council also rejects all of the arguments advanced by Ms Byrne in her full action.
In his ruling Mr Justice Meenan said that Ms Byrne was effectively seeking the same relief in the injunction application as what she seeks in her main action.
The judge said that in scenarios such as this the threshold that Ms Byrne must reach in order for the court to grant what were mandatory injunctions is high.
However, the court said the court was not satisfied that the material put before it, including on issues of European law, were strong enough to convince the court that her case is likely to succeed.
As that threshold had not been reached the court had to dismiss the application for the injunctions.
Ms Byrne's main action will be mentioned before the court in October.
