Consultation on the regulation of costs payable in matters prescribed on foot of section 294 of the Planning and Development Act 2024 (Scale of Fees)

An Taisce has made the following submission on the Consultation — please click here to read the full submission.

An Taisce considers that this consultation and the manner in which it has been conducted are wholly inadequate and have seriously breached fair procedures to the point where we believe the consultation is in fact unlawful. We do not consider the consultation to be fit for purpose and would reiterate our call for it be withdrawn.

Effective public participation is a requirement under the Aarhus Convention on the rights to public participation, access to justice, and access to information in environmental matters, to which both Ireland and the EU are parties.

This consultation was opened on 3rd December 2025 with a closing date of 15th January 2026, meaning it directly coincided with the very busy Christmas period. This is a traditional holiday period in Ireland over which time most people have multiple family and social obligations that seriously limit the public’s ability to effectively engage in public consultations. Furthermore, for those seeking to engage in a professional or organisational capacity, many workplaces are closed over this traditional holiday period, again limiting the capacity to engage. Multiple requests were made to the Department to extend the deadline, including by the Environmental Pillar, but no extension was granted.

This scale of fees proposal is a significant attack on civil society and public accountability. For the reasons laid out in the submission and in the attached letter, we firmly believe that the proposed changes are very clearly undemocratic, unfair and unlawful under the Aarhus Convention and EU law.

If adopted, they will undoubtedly lead to additional litigation with the possibility of referrals to the European Court. These changes are purportedly being introduced to expedite and facilitate the provision of very much needed critical infrastructure, but in reality they will only cause more uncertainty and delay. We cannot afford more uncertainly in the face of the crises we face in housing, energy, climate, etc. Furthermore, the proposed changes will lead to environmental harm and lower standards of environmental protection by completely hamstringing public interest environmental litigation at time when our imperilled environment can least afford it.

We therefore strongly recommend the following:

• Drop the current proposal, withdraw the consultation, and maintain the current system of cost rules, as clarified by the Heather Hill judgement;
• Go back to the drawing board, not just on the proposal laid out in the consultation, but also to conduct a full and transparent review, subject to full and effective public participation, of the legislation, systems, processes, etc. related to planning and judicial review (both planning  judicial reviews and other environmental judicial reviews). The review should then inform evidence-based proposals based on detailed analyses, data, and justifications where the impacts and proportionality of any future proposals are also fully assessed.
• Pause all additional amendments to planning legislation as well as any further changes to the judicial review rules to allow for such a review to take place.
• Focus on improving the quality of public authorities’ decision making, the quality of planning decisions, the quality of planning applications, and the quality of plan making. This is fundamental to ensuring that decisions are made robustly and lawfully and therefore do not need to end up in court in the first place.

Banner image of the Four Courts in Dublin: Pexels.com