High Court dismisses challenge seeking to quash permission for Kerry power plant

Judicial review challenge was brought by Friends of the Irish Environment

Mr Justice Humphreys said the development 'must be one of the most thoroughly litigated projects in recent times'. Picture: iStock

The High Court has dismissed a challenge by an environmental group seeking to quash An Coimiúsin Pleanala's (ABP's) decision to grant planning permission for a major power plant in north Kerry.

Mr Justice Richard Humphreys dismissed the judicial review challenge brought by Friends of the Irish Environment (FIE) last May against the March 2025 decision by ACP to grant permission to Shannon LNG for the proposed development of a 600-megawatt power plant and energy storage facility on a 630-acre site between Tarbert and Ballylongford on the Shannon estuary.

The plant will have sufficient capacity to power 160,000 homes.

In his 48-page written judgement published on Wednesday, Mr Justice Humphreys said the development “must be one of the most thoroughly litigated projects in recent times — this is the seventh written decision relating in one way or another to this project”.

He previously overturned the board’s previous refusal of planning permission for a power plant, battery energy storage system, and a regasification unit at the Shannon estuary site.

In dismissing FIE’s action against the March 2025 ACP permission, Mr Justice Humphreys said “the environmentalist’s rallying-cry 'keep it in the ground' has considerable logic and scientific support behind it”.

He said that apart from small amounts turned into not-exactly-eco-friendly plastic and other synthetic products, virtually all fossil fuels extracted are combusted, directly increasing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

He said that in keeping with this, the Climate Change Advisory Council recommended a near immediate end to coal and oil-fired energy generation, with gas-fired production to be phased out in the medium term.

He asked: “Why then, the applicant [FIE] effectively asks, does the commission find itself approving a gas-fired power plant?” 

He said a gas plant can "act as a resilience backbone to provide relatively rapid and relatively controllable power to bridge the gap between intermittent renewable generation and demand".

“Gas plants are highly dispatchable, ie, can be quickly ramped up or down to maintain grid stability. 

"Potentially some of them can be repurposed over time for use with renewable fuels. 

"While it is beyond question that the combustion of all fossil fuels is poisonous for the planet, gas is nowhere near as bad as peat, coal or oil in terms of GHG emission intensity.” 

He said that ACP took the view that this project will provide “back-up to a renewables-based electricity grid and will contribute to the resilience of the overall energy supply network”.

He said "the primary legal question here is whether the applicant has come up with any sufficiently convincing legal basis to displace the commission’s reasoned conclusion in that regard".

Mr Justice Humphreys concluded that it has not.

He said that none of the issues maintained by the FIE in the proceedings were raised before ACP.

Material capable of sustaining the point must have been properly before the decision-taker at the relevant time such as to give rise to a duty to consider it," he said.

Mr Justice Humphreys also found that it is settled law that FIE must have discharged the onus of proof to demonstrate inadequacy in EU law assessments or any other infirmity in a decision.

He said: “Applying such law to the facts here, the applicant has failed to discharge that onus here.”