AN ADMINISTRATIVE error in Clare County Council’s planning department cost the local authority €650,000 in a High Court settle- ment, it was confirmed yesterday.
Stunned councillors were told of the cost by council executives at a meet- ing behind closed doors on Monday.
The €650,000 payment is made up of compensation to a couple, Bernard Madigan and Mary Keane, as well as legal and professional fees and other “substantial” costs. The breakdown between compensation, legal and professional fees and the remaining costs has not been revealed.
The settlement arose from the cou- ple taking a High Court judicial re-
view over refusal of a planning ap- plication for 31 houses at Inagh.
Cllr PJ Kelly (FF), who called for the special meeting last month, said he was shocked by what he had been told by the council executives.
“TI didn’t think it could happen. It 1s beyond my wildest imagination what has occurred in this case,” he said.
He declined to state what details emerged from the meeting or the fig- ure involved, but said: “I don’t know the couple but I commend them for succeeding where others have failed and having the financial wherewithal to successfully challenge the system.
‘I hope we never see the likes of this again otherwise heads will roll.”
Cllr Kelly, who tabled a number of motions on the issue over the past
year, said the local government audi- tor could investigate the matter.
Cllr Madeleine Taylor Quinn (FG) said she was astounded at the infor- mation that had surfaced.
“This matter is not over yet and there are a lot of questions still to be answered,” she said.
At yesterday’s meeting, the council executives claimed there was no loss to the council as their insurer covered the €650,000 and they were able to claw back money in planning finan- cial contributions from the couple.
However, a number of councillors raised concerns over what effect the payout might have on the council’s premium.
Mr Madigan and Ms Keane lodged their application for 31 homes at a
site outside Inagh in 2005. It is under- stood that when they lodged further information on the application, it was not logged on the internal planning system and resulted in the due date for decision not being signalled.
This gave rise to the application not being decided upon within the prede- termined timeframe.
The two were then refused planning permission, but initiated High Court judicial review proceedings. Coun- cillors were told that if the case went to court, the local authority’s expo- sure could have been much higher.
Last year, the council granted plan- ning to the couple for a revised de- velopment on the same site. It is now up for sale with a guide price of €2 million.