The High Court has granted Dublin Airport operator daa leave to apply for a judicial review of a decision by Fingal County Council to enforce a limit on night-time flights at the airport.
The court also granted a stay preventing the enforcement notice issued by the council from being implemented.
It follows a warning by the daa that if it were to be enforced, as many as 4,400 flights involving more than 700,000 passengers may have to be cancelled between now and the middle of September.
Last week, it emerged that Fingal County Council had issued the notice, giving daa six weeks to cut the average number of aircraft movements taking place at the airport between 11pm and 7am each night during a 92-day reference period to 65 or less.
This had been a condition of the planning permission granted to the airport for the new north runway, which began operations in August last year.
But at the end of July, Fingal County Council told daa that an investigation had found that the airport is now in breach of the condition and ordered the airport to comply with it within six weeks.
The move and its timing in the busy summer season have been criticised by daa, which said it could lead to significant disruption for passengers and airlines.
This afternoon, its legal representatives applied to the High Court for permission to apply for a judicial review of the council's decision.
It also asked the court to impose a stay on the implementation of the enforcement notice, pending the outcome of the judicial review.
Outlining the daa's case, Senior Counsel Fintan Valentine for the company argued that fair procedures had been breached because of a refusal of Fingal County Council to provide a copy of the planning report that led to the decision.
He also claimed that the enforcement notice is invalid, as the council had failed to comply with Section 153(4) of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as the planning report had not been entered onto the Planning Register.
The daa’s legal team also claimed the council has failed to have any or any adequate regard to submissions made by it.
It also alleged that the enforcement notice is vague, imprecise and does not properly inform DAA of the allegation of unauthorised development being made against it and/or steps which are required to be taken in order to comply with it.
The daa argued that depending on the interpretation of the notice, daa could be required to cancel 287 flights affecting around 45,000 passengers, or 4,407 flights affecting 705,000 passengers, between now and 15 September.
The company’s legal team also claimed the planning condition - which is being enforced by the council - is so vague and imprecise as to be unenforceable.
It also claimed the council has failed to have any or any proper regard to the manner in which the co-ordination of slots at Dublin Airport is undertaken.
Mr Valentine added that what we have is an incomplete decision and an unreasoned decision and that is contrary to fair procedures and constitutional justice.
The application was made on an ex parte basis, with no legal representatives from Fingal County Council present in the court.
Having considered the arguments, Mr Justice Conor Dignam said he would grant the leave to apply for judicial review on a number of grounds.
He added that he would also grant the application for a stay, but added that if Fingal County Council wished to apply to have it lifted or varied, they could do so with 48 hours’ notice.
He put the case back for mention again on 14 November.
