A solicitor's letter from a company informing some residents living near the company's quarrying operation in Co Clare that the firm intended to issue proceedings against them was yesterday described as an "unwarranted threat".
On the second day of a Bord Pleanála hearing into plans by the Whelan Group to extend its quarry by 40 acres on the outskirts of Ennis, consultant Peter Sweetman said that a letter was received by the residents on Christmas Eve, 2004, stating that the group was going to issue proceedings against Cairn Hill Environmental Protection Group Ltd and its members.
Acting on behalf of the objectors, Mr Sweetman described the letter yesterday as an "unwarranted threat".
"The residents were not told what the proceedings were about. This letter is the only consultation made by the developer with the local residents."
Mr Sweetman read a submission from the Whelan Group at the hearing yesterday accusing Cairn Hill Environmental Protection Group Ltd of objecting to every development lodged by the Whelan Group, and expressing its concern that the whole objective of the Cairn Hill group was to appeal any development it made.
Mr Sweetman said: "The objective of the Cairn Hill Environmental Protection Group Ltd is to protect Cairn Hill from the Whelan Group."
Plans were lodged for the quarry extension in 2004, and this year Clare County Council granted planning.
However it limited the area to be quarried, refusing permission for sections six and seven of the permission.
Mr Sweetman told the hearing that the application, which was the subject of the appeal, was invalid in law "as this is a blatant example of project splitting".
The Whelan Group also appealed the council's recent decision on the proposed quarry extension.
It claimed that the jobs of 110 people working at the plant could be under threat because of the council restricting the multi-million euro expansion of the operation to a 10-year life-span.
At the hearing the board inspector has heard from 22 expert witnesses on behalf of the group.
The council refused planning permission for phases six and seven as they would cause the greatest level of impact on residents.
In its appeal the company said that not allowing phases six and seven of the proposal "is not technically substantiated, is very subjective and is lacking scientific basis as the council does not follow its own specialist findings and recommendations".
In its plans for the extension the Whelan Group sought permission to extend the life of the quarry by 26 years.
