Commercial Planning & SID List
I, Mary Irvine, President of the High Court, hereby issue the following practice direction in accordance with s. 11(12) and (13) of the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020.
Practice Direction HC103 is revoked and the following is substituted with effect from 5th July 2021.
1. The List Generally.
2. Strategic infrastructure development and strategic housing development.
3. Papers generally.
4. Schedules of directions.
5. Written Submissions.
6. Statements of grounds and opposition.
(1) The Commercial Planning & SID (Strategic Infrastructure Development) List (“the List”) encompasses the following categories of cases:
(a )judicial reviews relating to strategic infrastructure development and strategic housing development and
(b) planning cases admitted to the Commercial List.
(2) Applications for entry of planning cases to the Commercial List must continue to be made to the Judge in charge of the Commercial List under O. 63A of the Rules of the Superior Courts, and in the event that the case is entered in the Commercial List, the initial directions hearing under O. 63A r. 4(5)(b) will be listed for 10.15 am on the following Monday and conducted by the judge in charge of the List designated by the President (“the List Judge”) who will make all further directions in the case.
(3) There will be a callover at 10 am each Monday of cases for hearing over the following 2 sitting weeks (i.e., such that every case listed for hearing is called over twice, normally on the week of the hearing and the previous week) to ensure that all matters are in order. Any developments likely to affect listings or their duration should be notified to the court as soon as possible. Other cases for directions or mention will be listed at 10.15 am on Mondays. Parties who wish to have a case listed for mention for any reason should contact the List Registrar by 11 am on the Thursday of any given week with a view to being accommodated on the following Monday. If parties disagree about whether or when a matter should be listed, it will be listed on the earliest of any proposed dates.
(1) During term time and provided the List Judge is sitting or available to sit, all applications for leave to apply for judicial review in respect of permissions or decisions concerning strategic infrastructure development or strategic housing development must be made to the List Judge unless otherwise directed by the President or the List Judge.
(2) Where an applicant intends to mention an application or proposed application, he or she may do so on any day of the week and will normally be accommodated at the outset of the given day’s list.
(3) If the List Judge is not available, any such application may be made to the Judge in charge of the Judicial Review List or another judge of that list, and should apply to have the matter adjourned to the immediately following Ex Parte List for SID applications on the next sitting Monday.
(4) The List Judge will sit at 9.30 am each Monday during term to hear leave applications.
(5) Where any papers are provided to the court for the purposes of an ex parte application, applicants are encouraged to serve a copy of such papers as soon as such papers are provided to the court, or as soon as possible thereafter, on any intended respondents or developer notice party, for information to enable them to begin the process of considering their response at the earliest possible date.
(6) Should leave be granted to the applicant to apply for judicial review the standard terms which will apply in default of any order to the contrary will be as follows:
(a) time is extended (if the court is so satisfied) without prejudice to any point that may be raised by the respondents/ notice parties, if an extension is sought and explained on affidavit;
(b) leave to file an amended statement (if such leave is sought and the court is so satisfied) is granted, without prejudice to any point that may be raised by the respondents/ notice parties;
(c) leave is granted for the reliefs at section (d) of the (amended) statement on the grounds at section (e), without prejudice to any point that the respondents/ notice parties could have made;
(d) the notice of motion is to be returnable for 10.15 a.m. on the sitting Monday that is 2 weeks after the date of grant of leave;
(e) service of papers is to be effected within 7 days (and service of Notice of Motion within 7 days of perfection of the order) (other than papers already served prior to the grant of leave, which do not need to be re-served);
(f) in the case of State respondents/ notice parties, service is to be on the CSSO on behalf of such parties;
(g) if service is effected in accordance with the order, costs will be reserved; and if service is not so effected, the costs of the leave application will not be recoverable unless the court expressly so orders in any final order in the proceedings;
(h) the court’s default directions schedule will apply unless the parties agree otherwise and notify the List Registrar, or unless the court otherwise orders (such default directions are specified below);
(i) a party shall not recover the costs of any pleading, affidavit, exhibit or submission delivered in breach of a time limit set out in an agreed or ordered direction unless the court otherwise orders when making the final order as to costs;
(j) parties are requested and encouraged to agree to accept service of papers by email and to co-operate with each other to ensure that appropriate email addresses are exchanged.;
(k) the Respondent(s) and Notice Party shall indicate in writing in advance of the return date whether they accept that the present proceedings are covered by the costs protection provisions of section 50B of the Planning and Development Act 2000 as amended and/or otherwise;
(l) if sought by the applicant and if the court is so satisfied, and subject to such undertakings if any as the court may require bearing in mind the principle, where applicable, that proceedings are not to be prohibitively expensive, any decision or development impugned in (m) the proceedings shall be stayed, with effect from notification of the stay to the developer, with liberty to effect such notification by email or telephone, until the determination of the application for judicial review or until further order or until the stay shall have lapsed by reason of the Applicant’s failure to serve an originating Notice of Motion herein with liberty to any affected party to apply to the Court on notice in relation to the aforesaid stay;
(m) if the court is so satisfied, any reliefs against State respondents regarding the validity or ECHR compatibility of any primary or secondary legislation (not including any issues about adequacy of transposition) or of any instrument of general application (such as a guideline) are adjourned generally with liberty to re-enter pending the determination of the other issues; and
(n) liberty to apply.
(7) If an applicant seeks alternative directions, he/she should apply in that regard when seeking leave.Likewise if another party seeks alternative directions, the court should be notified as soon as possible if the matter cannot be agreed.
(8) The court’s default directions schedule is as follows:
(a) 1 week from the grant of leave for the applicant to serve all other parties where such service has not already been effected;
(b) 6 further weeks for any statement of opposition and affidavits (including exhibits) by the non-State respondents;
(c) 1 further week for any statement of opposition and affidavits (including exhibits) by State respondents unless the case against such respondents has been adjourned;
(d) 1 further week for any statement of opposition and affidavits (including exhibits) by any notice parties;
(e) 3 further weeks for any replying affidavits (including exhibits) by the applicant;
(f) 2 further weeks for any final replying affidavits (including exhibits) by any other party;
(g) Following the fixing of a hearing date (but not before then), the applicant to have 2 weeks for written legal submissions;
(h) 2 further weeks for non-State respondents to deliver written legal submissions;
(i) 1 further week for State respondents to deliver written legal submissions;
(l)1 further week for notice parties to deliver written legal submissions.
(9) In the foregoing schedule, weeks means weeks including September but otherwise excluding vacations.
(10) As the only papers to be provided physically are the ex parte docket and a copy of the statement of grounds, these documents will be retained by the court after the leave hearing. If parties unnecessarily provide any other papers for the leave hearing these may not be returned.
(1) Insofar as reference is hereinafter made to the electronic provision of documents, please note that any such reference should not be misunderstood as a reference to “electronic filing” which concerns pleadings, and which can only be provided for in Rules of Court. (see s. 20 Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020. Regardless of the provisions of this Practice Direction, all pleadings must be filed in the Central Office in accordance with the Rules of the Superior Courts.
(2) Papers shall be furnished to the court in accordance with Appendix 3 below.
(3) Where a pleading or submission is delivered in breach of any deadline set by a relevant Practice Direction or a direction of the court, it shall be for the defaulting party to show why such party’s costs of that document should be included in any costs order, unless the court expressly so orders when allowing costs.
(1) Agreed schedules of exchange of pleadings shall ensure compliance with the deadlines for delivery of papers set out herein.
(2) Parties may agree any variation to the schedule of directions between themselves without reference to the court, provided that papers will be provided to the court by the deadlines herein. Parties should note also that consent variations of agreed timescales should be notified to the List Registrar and do not require to be brought before the court. Generally parties should correspond on any issues and not raise them with the court during the weekly list unless agreement has first been sought and refused.
(3) Schedules of directions may provide for a separate Case Management conference listing once the proceedings are sufficiently advanced, in order to discuss the ordering of the hearing, possible modularisation or any other such issues.
(1) Where written submissions prepared by legal practitioners (“substantive written submissions”) are to be relied on by a party, such party shall have regard to Practice Direction HC101 as amended in order to avoid, if possible, the need for preparing a separate version of written submissions for public release.
(2) It shall be a standard term of any final order in the List in an application in which substantive written submissions were relied on that, pursuant to and/or consistent with Practice Direction HC101, (1) a copy of any written submissions that were relied upon in the course of the proceedings be filed at the Central Office within 14 days of the within Order, (2) the copy of any such submissions so filed comply with the requirements of the Practice Direction aforesaid and be entitled “Written Submissions for Public Release” (3) the Written Submissions for Public Release be made available to members of the public if requested in accordance with the conditions set out in the Practice Direction.
(3) Where the written submissions for public release involve redaction or other amendment of the substantive written submission, the party delivering such version shall confirm to the court that the submissions correspond to the substantive written submissions relied at for the hearing.
(4) The following provisions of PD HC97 shall not apply to the List:
• Para. 3(c)(v) (word limit), and in lieu thereof, written submissions may be up to 10,000 words long not including annexes, and issue papers are not required.
• Para 5(g) (limit on numbers of authorities that may be included in the book of authorities);
• Para 6 (issue papers).
(5) Parties are to approach substantive hearings on the basis that all papers are to be taken as read but parties may add to their legal submissions an appendix with a Statement/Summary of the most important aspect of exhibits contained in Affidavits in the case, up to 3,000 words which will not count as part of the word limit for written legal submissions.
(6) Where the submissions as so delivered raise any question(s) of EU law, the party raising or answering the issue should include as a discrete appendix to the submission a list of the precise question(s) of EU law concerned. Any party that seeks a reference under Art. 267 TFEU should indicate that in advance by way of a note to their statement of EU law issues in their submissions.
(7) Following the close of pleadings proper and exchange of affidavits, and before the preparation of any submissions, the applicant shall prepare a complete index of papers and submit it to all other parties to agree the format of papers. Parties are encouraged to do this well in advance of submissions so that submissions can refer to agreed and consistent parts of the papers. Parties are also encouraged to ensure that the agreed index corresponds in an identifiable way to the USB stick provided to the List Judge for the hearing.
(1) The statement of grounds must follow the headings / numbering used in the Rules of Court, Appendix T, form No. 13 as follows:
(a) Applicant’s name: [Note this section must be headed (a) not (1), (i) etc., and so on]
(b) Applicant’s address:
(c) Applicant’s description:
(d) Relief sought:
(e) Grounds upon which such relief is sought:
(f) Name and registered place of business of solicitors for Applicant.
(2) Section (e) should be divided into the following parts:
(a) If there are more than two pages of legal grounds, the first part should be headed “Core grounds” and should set out the summary grounds of challenge in the format specified in Appendix 1 below. The legal grounds of challenge should be set out in numbered paragraphs, starting with 1. The section on Core Grounds may not exceed 2 pages. A template example of grounds is at Appendix 1 which should be used with any necessary modifications. The core grounds section should be divided into three sub-divisions (insofar as applicable) as follows:
(i) Domestic law grounds (this should exclude validity grounds but includes a challenge to an individual decision by reference to the ECHR as incorporated by domestic law);
(ii) EU law grounds, excluding validity grounds but including non-transposition (if non-transposition is pleaded, Ireland and the Attorney General must be respondents);
(iii) Validity grounds, if the validity or ECHR compatibility of any primary or secondary legislation, or measure of general application (such as a guideline) is impugned (Ireland and the Attorney General are necessary respondents if any such grounds are raised).
(b) The next part should be headed “Particulars of Grounds” and the (particulars of) legal grounds of challenge should then be set out in numbered paragraphs, re-starting with 1.
(c) The final part should be headed “Factual Grounds” and the relevant facts and matters relied on shall be set out in numbered paragraphs, re-starting with 1, in chronological order.
(3) Parties considering challenging any preliminary decision prior to the final substantive decision should seek consent from the proposed respondents and notice parties to the effect that no point will be taken against the applicants if the challenge is postponed to the final decision and that an extension of time for that purpose will be consented to. If such consent is not forthcoming and an application is brought, the court may award costs of that challenge against any party who caused unnecessary costs to be incurred by declining to furnish such consent.
(4) Pleadings which claim an excessive number of reliefs and/or involve an excessive number of grounds may be held to be in breach of the duty to avoid waste of the court’s time. Accordingly, statements of grounds should not normally claim relief that is in substance merely repetitive of the primary relief sought (for example by seeking a declaration that a decision is ultra vires while at the same time seeking certiorari), and nor should grounds be pleaded as repetitive reformulations. Practitioners should have regard to the principle that duplicative relief is not normally granted, and that therefore, with limited exceptions, declarations are generally redundant if substantive relief by way of certiorari or mandamus is granted, and inappropriate if that substantive relief is refused.
(5) An applicant may however in any case, in addition to substantive relief by way of certiorari or mandamus, seek declarations as follows:
(a) a relief along the lines of: “Such declaration(s) of the legal rights and/or legal position of the applicant and (if and insofar as legally permissible and appropriate) persons similarly situated and/or of the legal duties and/or legal position of the respondent as the court considers appropriate”, or a relief to the like effect. The precise terms of any such declaration sought can then be addressed by way of legal submissions within the confines of the legal grounds pleaded in the statement of grounds, or in such manner as the court considers appropriate having decided the substantive legal issues.
(b) In addition, any relief regarding the validity/ ECHR compatibility of a provision of primary or secondary legislation or a document of general application (such as a guideline) should be sought by separate declaration.
(c) Any relief declaring there to have been a failure to transpose any EU measure should be by separate declaration.
(d) An applicant can also seek a declaration that special costs rules apply, whether under s. 50B of the Planning and Development Act 2000, s. 3 of the Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011, or otherwise.
(6) Any declaratory relief should not itemise the specific errors concerned - that should be done in the grounds.
(7) A statement of opposition is required if facts are relied on therein (O. 84 r. 22(4) RSC) but does not need to be supported by an affidavit if no specific factual plea is made and it consists only of one or more of the following:
(a) a traverse of any or all of the matters alleged in the statement of grounds;
(b) a legal plea arising from facts put forward by, or documents exhibited by, an applicant;
(c) a legal plea arising from facts otherwise on the court record that do not require to be put in evidence (such as an objection as to time arising from the date of filing of pleadings).
(8) In accordance with O. 84 r. 22(4) RSC, a statement of opposition that contains a positive plea that is based on evidential matters not otherwise before the court must be supported by an affidavit.
(9) In giving effect to Order 84 r. 22(5), it is unnecessary for a statement of opposition to contain a denial of the allegations of fact or law in a statement of grounds individually, issue by issue or paragraph by paragraph, or to assert that the applicant is not entitled to relief or costs, or that the respondent(s)/ notice party(/ies) are entitled to costs. It is sufficient for a statement of opposition to contain only the following:
(a) a statement that the allegations of fact and law in the statement of grounds are denied save (if applicable) that specified matters in the statement of grounds are admitted and/or that the applicant is put on strict proof of specified matters, and/or a statement that the matters of fact relied on by the applicant do not give rise to legal grounds for the relief claimed; and
(b) a statement of any specific matters of fact or law positively relied on by the respondent(s)/ notice party(/ies), for example that specified facts or circumstances preclude the grant of relief, that the proceedings are out of time or are an impermissible collateral challenge to a specified previous unchallenged decision, or that relief should be refused due to failure by the applicant to disclose specified facts or matters when obtaining leave, by reason of a specified alternative remedy, or in the discretion of the court having regard to specified facts and circumstances.
(10) Statements of grounds and statements of opposition must be dated and must state the names of any counsel who settled such documents.
(11) Any pleading which has been amended shall, in accordance with Order 28 rule 9, Rules of the Superior Courts, be marked with the date of the order under which the same is amended, and the day on which such amendment is made, as follows:
“Amended the …… day of …… pursuant to order of Mr. / Ms. Justice …… dated the day …… of ….…” This formula should be inserted immediately below the title of the pleading, for example “Amended Statement of Grounds” followed by “Amended the ... day of ... etc.”
(1) The court may direct hearings to take place in specified modules. Generally, the application or otherwise of special costs rules will be decided before the main hearing. The court may also consider the preliminary trial of points such as whether proceedings are premature/ out of time or involve a collateral challenge out of time to a decision previously made.
(2) All written and oral submissions must follow the sequence of clearly dividing domestic law issues, EU law issues and validity issues as set out in relation to core grounds in this Practice Direction, and shall address those issues in that order unless otherwise directed.
(3) The time allocated to a hearing will normally be 3 days (with the final time allocation to be decided by the court). In general, if two or more cases are to be heard together relating to the same development, 4 days will be provided.
(4) Where proceedings raise a point that is or becomes pending in other proceedings either on appeal or before the CJEU, the parties shall notify the court as soon as possible of the issue (irrespective of whether a date has been fixed for hearing or not) and of their attitude to whether the matter should await the outcome of those other proceedings.
(5) Parties are reminded that the decision on time allocations for hearings and the division of time between parties is ultimately a matter for the court, and in so deciding the court will take into account but will not be bound by any agreement or views of the parties.
(6) Apart from any case afforded priority, a date will not be fixed until all pleadings and affidavits have been exchanged in full, and all interlocutory matters finalised; but the parties can consider refraining from delivering written legal submissions until the date is actually fixed so that such submissions deal with the more up-to-date caselaw.
(7) Where sufficient dates are available in the term following the date in which a case first enters the list, a provisional hearing date may be assigned at that point or subsequently.
(8) Otherwise, dates for any given term will be fixed at the start of the previous term by way of a list to fix dates, which will normally be held on the second sitting Monday of each term along the lines of the template notice attached at Appendix 2.
(9) Subject to the interests of justice and submissions in any given case, the court’s general approach will be to conduct the hearing of the domestic and EU law issues on the assumption for the sake of argument that all relevant legislation and policy documents are valid. If any challenge is made to a measure of general application, whether legislative or policy document, any grounds of challenge must normally first be raised in the main module(s) by first seeking a conforming interpretation. Issues of transposition will normally be dealt with as part of any main module rather than subsequently. Parties must approach oral hearings on the basis that the court will itself decide the order in which it wants particular points addressed, but normally in the sequence domestic law, EU law and validity issues. Parties are reminded that time breakdowns for oral submissions at any substantive hearing must not be taken to be fully guaranteed and may be reduced to accommodate a certain amount of wastage due to for example unanticipated interruptions, so as to finish by the deadline specified in advance. Legal practitioners must therefore plan to leave some margin for such matters when preparing their oral submissions.
(10) All business of the list will be conducted remotely, except where it is demonstrated by a party seeking a physical hearing that the interests of justice so require.
(11) Substantive hearings will take place on Tuesday to Friday and generally hearing dates will commence on a Tuesday.
8. Judgments and Orders
(1) Unless otherwise directed, reserved judgments will be delivered by electronic publication on courts.ie. Parties are not required to attend court either physically or remotely for such purpose.
(2) Following the delivery of any written judgment, any party seeking any order other than costs following the event should provide a submission to that effect within 7 days.
(3) Unless otherwise directed, final orders in proceedings will not be perfected until 28 days after a written judgment (if the court decides to deliver one) has been published. If during that period any issues are raised regarding, inter alia, the form of the order, costs, leave to appeal or a stay the order will not be perfected (unless otherwise directed) until the determination of such issues. Where any written judgment is delivered the proceedings shall be listed for mention in the list that is next following the expiry of 28 days from the date of the delivery of the judgment, or such earlier time as is convenient to either confirm that no issues requiring decision arise or to manage such issues, and if the latter, the parties shall seek to agree in advance a timescale for delivery of written submissions on the issues concerned.
(Delete as applicable/ use any necessary modifications)
(Each ground should be in “ratio” format as if it was a point in a headnote)
PART 1 - CORE GROUNDS
(1) DOMESTIC LAW GROUNDS
1) The (define the decision) (“the impugned decision”) is invalid in that it contravenes art. ss. X and Y of the .... Act ... by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
2) The impugned decision is invalid in that it is (unreasonable/ disproportionate/ lacks reasons etc.) insofar as it ..... (indicate broad heading of the administrative law infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
3) The impugned decision is invalid in that it contravenes Article X of the Constitution by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below
4) The impugned decision is invalid in that it is incompatible with the State’s obligations under art X of the ECHR, a Convention provision for the purposes of s. 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
(2) EU LAW GROUNDS
5) The impugned decision is invalid in that it contravenes art. X of directive X by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
(3) VALIDITY GROUNDS
6. Regulation .... of the (name of instrument) (S.I. No. ....) or paragraph .... of the .... Guidelines is ultra vires and invalid in that it contravenes s. X of the .... Act by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
7. Section .... of the .... Act.... is invalid in that it contravenes Article X of the Constitution / article X of directive ...... (etc.) by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
8. Regulation .... of the (name of instrument) (S.I. No. ....) or paragraph .... of the .... Guidelines or Section .... of the .... Act.... is incompatible with the State’s obligations under art X of the ECHR, a Convention provision for the purposes of s. 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003, by failing to (indicate broad heading of the infirmity), further particulars of which are set out in Part 2 below.
PART 2 – PARTICULARS OF GROUNDS
9. By way of further particulars of the claim that the impugned decision contravenes s. .... of the .... Act ..., .....(insert particulars as necessary). ....
PART 3 – FACTUAL GROUNDS
10. (set out all relevant dates and factual matters in chronological order). ....
NOTICE FOR PUBLICATION IN LEGAL DIARY
The List to Fix Dates will take place on the Second sitting Monday of term (Monday .....) at 9.30 am.
Cases can obtain a date in one of two ways.
(i) Any case may be given priority, irrespective of whether pleadings have been closed, if so decided by the court (further details are as set out below)
(ii) Non-priority cases will be dealt with in record number order subject to the relevant party applying for a date and subject to the matter being ready.
The dates that are likely to be available are as follows, and parties in any given case should liaise with each other in advance on dates in order to have an order of preference ready when their case is called in order to avoid the matter having to be addressed by the court:
Weeks beginning Tuesday:
(I) APPLICATIONS FOR PRIORITY
Any party that wishes to have priority should serve a short submission (maximum 1000 words) on the other parties and deliver same to the court by 1 pm on the previous Wednesday (date ....). The List Judge will determine whether priority is to be afforded based on the papers.
The submission should address the following matters:
(a) The reason for the application for priority. In that regard, the special or unusual nature of the development may give rise to urgency for the matter to be determined. Also, priority will generally be afforded to any case which has been modularised and where a previous module has been determined against the applicant. The history of a previous judicial review that has been fully determined and that has been followed by a remittal or a fresh or related planning application will not automatically be a reason for priority. Likewise if the development is of a type that is the subject of other similar applications and proceedings, the case will not automatically be given priority based on its subject-matter.
(b) The attitude of the other parties insofar as can be ascertained;
(c) There are no legal issues pleaded that could be determinative and that are the subject-matter of an appeal in any other case or a CJEU reference in any other proceedings (or if so, the party’s proposals for modularisation to avoid cutting across the appellate or European process).
(d) If any other proceedings have been issued challenging the same decision, those must be identified and all related proceedings will be marked as linked in the List to Fix Dates;
(e) The matter will be accommodated within the usual 3 days (or 4 days if more than one case is being heard together), or if not, the matter can be modularised in a specified way in order that the current module can fit within that timescale.
(II) APPLICATIONS IN RECORD NUMBER ORDER
Given the limited number of dates available, applications for inclusion in the list for non-priority cases will be limited to the first ____ cases by record number. These cases are as follows:
- (oldest case by record no.)
The party with responsibility for the development (or in default, any party) should apply to the List Registrar by 1 pm on the previous Wednesday, (date), in order to list any given case.
The solicitors for the party applying to put the case in the List to Fix Dates must certify as follows:
(i) That as of the time of the application for the case to be put in the List to Fix Dates, all pleadings, affidavits and exhibits have been delivered by all parties and there are no outstanding interlocutory matters (noting that there is no requirement for submissions to have been delivered before the List to Fix Dates);
(ii) There are no legal issues pleaded that could be determinative and that are the subject-matter of an appeal in any other case or a CJEU reference in any other proceedings (or if so, the party’s proposals for modularisation to avoid cutting across the appellate or European process);
(iii) If any other proceedings have been issued challenging the same decision, those must be identified and all related proceedings will be marked as linked in the List to Fix Dates;
(iv)The matter will be accommodated within the usual 3 days (or 4 days if more than one case is being heard together), or if not, the matter can be modularised in a specified way in order that the current module can fit within that timescale;
(v)Whether the party wishes a provisional hearing date if a definite date is not available; and
(vi) All other parties agree to the foregoing or if not, the reasons why this should not prevent a date being fixed.
All other cases not listed above other than cases being given priority may be listed in the following list to fix dates in (date).
1. Statement of grounds, statements of opposition, amended pleadings and written submissions should be emailed to the court (all in word format, via the List Registrar and cc’d to the List Judge’s Judicial Assistant) as soon as those documents are delivered to other parties
2. Where papers are provided by USB stick, files shall be organised and assigned file names that makes access straightforward. An excessive number of sub-directories or separate files shall be avoided.
3. All email communications to the court must give the full name and record number of the case and state the document being submitted, in the title of the email, with spaces between each word/ number - preferably in the form (year) (space) number (space) JR (applicant) (space) v (space) (respondent) (space) (document submitted e.g. applicant’s submissions).
4. When submitting papers in word document format, practitioners should clear formatting as much as possible in Word. Word "headings" should be avoided as much as possible. Word documents must be in a minimum of 12 point type.
5. Where a physical copy of a document is to be submitted to the court parties must proceed as follows:
(a) If any such papers require to be filed in the Central Office, the papers must first be so filed;
(b) Papers for the courts attention (in copy filed version if applicable) should be provided to the court by being left in the List Room for the attention of the List Judge.
Papers for Leave applications
6. By 1 pm on the Friday before the Monday list in which the leave application is listed, the applicant should furnish the following to the court:
(a) Ex parte docket in physical form (by lodging in List Room);
(b) Statement of grounds (or latest amended statement) in physical form, dated and stamped as filed (by lodging in List Room);
(c) Statement of grounds (or latest amended statement) in word document form, emailed to the List Registrar and cc’d to the List Judge’s Judicial Assistant;
(d) All other papers in electronic form (either email/ file sharing site/ USB stick).
Papers for Motions
7. By 1 pm on the 2nd Friday before the date on which the motion is listed, the parties (via the applicant or whichever other party as may agree to do so) should furnish the court with a USB stick for the attention of the List Judge, containing all relevant materials, including
i. Statement of grounds, statements of opposition, amended pleadings and written submissions in word document format;
ii. All other papers in PDF (preferably searchable).
Papers for Substantive Hearings
8. By 1 pm on the 2nd Friday before the date on which the hearing is listed, the parties (via the applicant or whichever other party as may agree to do so) should furnish the court with:
(a) a “Core Book” in physical form which should be strictly limited to the essential documents and should insofar as possible be a single ring binder with a maximum of approximately 450 pages, to be provided by lodging in the List Room. Tabs shall be in integers starting with 1. It shall contain the following:
i. the (latest amended) statement of grounds (which should be the first item in the book but apart from that the documents should be in chronological order);
ii. Any board inspector’s report;
iii. Any impugned board decision;
iv. the order granting leave, (latest amended) and statements of opposition - note written submissions are not required be provided physically in the core book;
v. Any other particularly significant document likely to be referred to frequently at the oral hearing that the parties agree to include for convenience (without prejudice to the right to open any document in the papers at the hearing).
(b) 2 identical copies of a USB stick for the attention of the List Judge, containing all relevant materials, including
i. statement of grounds, statements of opposition, amended pleadings and written submissions in word document format;
ii. All other papers in PDF (preferably searchable).
9. If the papers set out above are not provided by the deadline stated herein, the court may vacate the hearing date or downgrade it to a provisional date only subject to further directions, and may consider an appropriate as to costs implications.
10. Following the lodging of papers, parties shall provide a list of authorities in advance of the hearing date. In lieu of a physical book of authorities, a word document list of authorities shall be provided, with web addresses or hyperlinks. If any given authority is not available on the internet, a hard copy should be provided.
11. Any future schedules of directions will be expressly subject to the requirement to have all papers delivered to the court by 1 pm on the 2nd Friday before the hearing date.
President of the High Court
Dated 17th June, 2021.
I, Mary Irvine, President of the High Court, hereby direct as follows in accordance with s. 11(12) and (13) of the Civil Law and Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020.
In addition to the cases specified in para. 1(1) of Practice Direction HC107, the Commercial Planning and Strategic Infrastructure List shall encompass judicial reviews under the Planning and Development (Amendment) (Large-scale Residential Development) Act 2021.
President of the High Court
Dated: 11th April, 2022
(This Addendum is revoked by HC114 dated the 29th September 2022)