A five-judge Supreme Court will rule on a later date on an appeal aimed at quashing permission for a Co Kilkenny cheese plant.
Having heard final submissions on Thursday in the two-day hearing, Chief Justice Donal O’Donnell said the court was reserving its judgment.
An Taisce/ The National Trust for Ireland appealed a High Court order upholding An Bord Pleanála's June 2020 permission for Glanbia's €140 million cheese factory proposed for Belview. It is to be developed under a joint venture agreement with Glanbia's Dutch partner Royal-A-Ware.
The appeal centres on the extent to which the planning board should have considered and assessed the plant’s upstream consequences, arising from off-site milk production, for the purposes of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Habitats, and Water Framework directives.
Michael M Collins SC, for An Bord Pleanála, said there was no requirement for the board to assess the potential environmental effects of activities that are not within the scope of the development project itself. He said the 4,500 or so farms expected to supply milk are not "structurally interdependent" on the Glanbia plant.
Speaking hypothetically, he noted that each farm would need its own relevant assessment if they were to expand operations. The farms are all subject to national climate regulations, he added.
Mr Collins said the production of milk “undoubtedly” has an environmental impact but this is not a direct or indirect effect of this proposed development under the meaning of the EIA Directive.
Rory Mulcahy SC, for developer Kilkenny Cheese Limited, said the starting point for assessing potential environmental effects of a development is whether the activity is part of the project being considered. Government policy is for national milk production to rise to 9.5 billion litres per year, and there is no challenge to the conclusion that this cheese plant would not require additional milk not encompassed in this national figure, he said.
Attorney General Paul Gallagher SC said An Taisce has raised some important arguments that need to be addressed, but he said the answer in this case is "straight forward".
Mr Gallagher said there were other laws, some due to be introduced, to protect the environment beyond the directives being referenced in this action. The meeting of environmental targets should be considered at a government policy level because there are “trade-offs” to be made, he said. It would be “problematic” if individual cases such as this determined large policy matters, he said.
Previously, An Taisce’s lawyers told the court that the potential environmental impact of producing 450 million litres of milk to supply the plant should be treated as “significant indirect effects” of the development.
Neil Steen SC, for An Taisce, said it accepts the supply of milk is not part of the development itself, but the EIA Directive envisaged that a project's offsite effects should be considered. The provision of milk to the plant raises "serious concerns" about Ireland's greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions, as well as nitrate pollutants affecting water quality, said Mr Steen.
An Taisce’s case is against An Bord Pleanála, the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and the Environment, Ireland, and the Attorney General, while Kilkenny Cheese is a notice party.
