The High Court has ordered the operator of an unlicensed recycling business in Kildare to carry out remediation works to remove 20,000 tonnes of waste on his land.
Patrick Merlehan, trading as Ark Recycling, has operated a recycling business at Newtown, Moone, without a licence to do so for more than 12 years, according to Kildare County Council.
The council sought orders from the court preventing him from continuing to carry on these activities and an order that he remediate the site.
On Tuesday, Mr Justice Anthony Barr ordered that Mr Merlehan carry out remediation in accordance with the council's proposals to ensure that the risk to the environment is eliminated. The judge will later hear submissions from both sides as to a timeframe for the carrying out of the works.
Mr Merlehan, who lives beside his business, owns around 6.5 acres in a rural area primarily used for agriculture. He previously held two waste permits, the last of which expired in 2009.
Following inspections in 2013, the council brought prosecutions over continuing unlicensed activity.
The District Court refused jurisdiction to hear the case because of the volume of waste on the land. Subsequently, however, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), who must prosecute the matter if it is to be heard in a higher court, decided not to pursue the prosecution in the Circuit Court.
Hazardous waste
The council got an expert to inspect the land, who reported there was about 20,200 tonnes of material on the site, made up of a mixture of hazardous waste, potentially hazardous waste and non-hazardous waste.
In November 2019, the council got an interim order from the High Court restraining Mr Merlehan from accepting waste on the site without the council's permission or order of the court.
Mr Merlehan appealed, but failed to comply with requirements to file certain paperwork and his appeal was struck out by the Court of Appeal.
The council then returned to the court seeking permanent orders restraining him from accepting further waste and to carry out remediation works.
Mr Merlehan, who represented himself, accepted there was waste on his site but he was no longer accepting it.
He had approached a number of companies from whom he had accepted waste and asked them to remove it, but only one firm complied with his request. He denied the waste posed a threat to human health or the environment.
He was willing to come to an amicable solution with the council in relation to the waste on his land.
He also said that while he may be a “rag and bone man” due to the fact that he dealt in materials that other people may not want, he denied he was a waste contractor.
He wished to continue buying and selling cars and mobile homes in a small way. Material that was currently in the yard was his stock-in-trade, he said.
Mr Justice Barr said he was satisfied from the evidence that Mr Melehan accepted and held waste which constituted a risk to the environment and human health.
The court was satisfied that the remediation options as proposed by the council are necessary to ensure that the risk is eliminated, while at the same time being fair and proportionate to Mr Merlehan.
