A Meath haulage company’s appeal against a decision by Meath County Council to refuse it permission to bring waste onto lands at Kellystown, Ballyhoe, Drumconrath was brought before Navan District Court on Friday (11/7/25). Haulage firm G F Farrelly of Knock, Castletown had been refused permission on 29th August last year to bring waste onto those lands. James Hughes, the owner of the lands, gave evidence in court.
Asked by solicitor David McEntee acting for Meath County Council if he was the owner he confirmed that he was and that the lands benefited from a planning permission. He was asked if he was willing to allow any further material, say topsoil, from the site. He said there was enough subsoil there. Mr McEntee put it to him that, effectively, “the site is full”. Mr Hughes said that it was not full. Asked if he was consenting to the importation of waste to the site he said he was “consenting to more topsoil”.
Asked by Judge Eirinn McKiernan if he was consenting to more waste he replied that there was enough subsoil and added that there was “enough waste”. Asked by the judge if he was consenting to more waste he replied “not any more waste, no”.
Council executive engineer Paul Aspell confirmed that the lands were agricultural lands. He said five conditions attached to the planning permission had not been complied with. For instance, in one condition the works on the site extended outside the “red line” of the planning permission. He assumed that more material had been placed on the site.
A condition that there should be a weighbridge on the site was also breached. The council was to get a topographical report every six months but this condition had not been complied with. The developer was also due to pay a “cash contribution” but this had not been done. Asked by Mr McEntee if planning permission had not been complied with, could work take place, Mr Aspell replied “It shouldn’t, no”.
Asked if the council was bringing a prosecution for non-compliance he replied that there was an “unauthorised file at the minute”. He also said there was an application for retention. In reply to questions from the judge Mr Aspell said that a waste application would follow a planning application for the site.
The judge said there were two matters to be taken into account – that the consent of the owner of the land is given and that the development has planning permission. “The owner, somewhat reluctantly, said he was not giving permission and the council said it was an unauthorised
development”, she said. For that reason she was dismissing the appeal. She refused Mr McEntee’s application for the council’s legal costs.
