Supreme Court Protects Carrowmore Site
An article in The Irish Times 28 Feburary 1989
A number of Co. Sligo residents yesterday won their appeal in the Supreme Court in
Dublin against a High Court ruling that a proposed refuse dump
at the Carrowmore megalithic site did not constitute a material
contravention of the Sligo Development Plan.
Mr Justice McCarthy
in his judgment, with Mr Justice Hederman agreed, also upheld
their appeal against the finding that the proposed refuse dump
was not in contravention of the provision of the National Monuments
Act, 1930, as amended.
The judge said the council had thought
it could go ahead without notice to scientific bodies, the community,
those whose planning had been refused, and without encountering any real resistance.
The Kissing Stone at Carrowmore with Knocknarea mountain in the background
The council was wrong, he said. It reckoned
without that combination of private advantage and public spiritedness
that sometimes goes to law to bring bureaucracy to heel. It reckoned
without the plaintiffs Mr Frank McGarry, Mr Paddy O'Hara,
Ms Patricia Mulligan, Mr Neil Cremin and Mr John Hamilton
who lived and owned property nearby. The judge paid tribute to
their courage for having, at considerable monetary risk, challenged
the conduct of the local authority.
Mr. Justice Mc Carthy
quoted a Bord Failte guide describing the site and its surrounds.
It said that in Co. Sligo one of the largest groups of megalithic
remains in Western Europe could be found at Carrowmore, three
miles from Sligo, there were dolmens, stone circles and cairns,
with sepulchral monuments bearing carvings thought to date from the Bronze Age.
In 1979 Sligo Council Council reviewed its developments
plan. This incorporated verbatim parts of the Local Government
( Planning and Development) Act,1963, which referred to the preservation
of caves, sites, features and other objects of archaeological,
geological and historical interest.
There was also reference to the prohibition, regulation and control of the disposal of
waste and refuse and pollution. The context of the relevant part,
said Mr Justice McCarthy, seemed to recognise the amenities were
of the kind with views, prospects and features of natural beauty
or interest, and that refuse disposal could be prohibited or controlled.
Mr Justice McCarthy said the plan listed 32 items
of preservation or protection including the Carrowmore Passage
Grave Cemetery. It incorporated a Foras Forbartha report which
stated there were at least 65 tombs in the area.
The report said
it seemed probable there were originally many more and that the
number of tombs had been decreasing steadily. Unless a firm stand
was taken the destruction would continue, but if action was taken
there was time to save what was still one of the most important
and impressive complexes of prehistoric monuments in Ireland.
Mr. Justice McCarthy
said the plan had identified Knocknarea and the Carrowmore cemetery
as part of the cultural heritage of Co. Sligo and a number of
application for planning permission had been refused on grounds
related to that plan.
The plan, said the judge, was a statement
of objectives. When adopted it forms an environmental contract
between the planning authority, the council and the community,
embodying a promise by the council that it will regulate private
development in a manner consistent with the objectives stated
in the plan and, further, that the council itself shall not effect
any development which contravenes the plan materially.
The judge
quoted Yeats:
The wind had bundled up the clouds high over
Knocknarea and thrown the thunder on the stones for all that
Maeve can say.
Mr. Justice McCarthy said Sligo County Council
had dumping facilities at Ballymote and Finisklin, which at the
time of the action was in poor condition. The council had examined
more than 12 sites to expand its refuse disposal facilities.
At Carrowmore over many
years one Bernard Devaney had been quarrying sand and gravel
from land clearly part of the passage grave cemetery, at least
at one time. This left an enormous hole in the ground. The county
council saw this as a convenient refuse dump. It consulted nobody,
not even those with whom it had the environmental contract its own community.
Mr. Justice McCarthy said that in July, 1983,
the plaintiffs had begun an action against the council seeking
an injunction against the use of the pit as a refuse dump or
pit head and a variety of other relief's. He outlined the various
proceedings over the years and how the final structure of the
action included the Attorney General with the plaintiffs.
The Supreme Court had
to decide if the High Court erred in finding that the proposed
refuse dump did not constitute a material contravention of the
plan, and was not in contravention of the National Monuments Act.
It would seem that if a refuse dump constituted an actionable
nuisance it had to be a contravention of the development plan.
This nuisance, it was said, was allayed by a management plan,
although it involved some 80 vehicle movements a day, the building
of a keeper's house, of offices, canteen and toilets.
It was somewhat ironic, he said, that the plaintiffs should contend
with some force, that the management plan itself involved a material
contravention of the plan. But he would not rest his judgment
on this ground. In his view the development plan expressed with
admirable clarity the objectives of the council, and identified
the unique importance of the passage grave cemetery.
But such professions of intent and concern are mere window dressing if, without reference
to the many skilled and interested bodies and groups, with the
understandable wish to provide adequate refuse disposal for the
demands of the county, the council proposes to use the site or
part of the site, or a part adjoining the site, as a refuse dump.
Mr. Justice McCarthy
said there had been much debate on the exact location of the
Carrowmore cemetery. He would not bound his judgment on a restricted
approach. If a particular area be identified as an area for conservation
for any amenity reason, one does not then legitimately permit
development to the very boundary of the area; either the area
must itself be prescribed as extending to a sufficient circumference
as will allow for a fallow area in between, or must envisage
that such fallow area shall adequately extend outside the immediate
area of the amenity.
In his view the use of
the quarry as a refuse dump or pit head was a clear and material
contravention of the development plan. It seemed to him to be
of little moment that a road divided the quarry from the main
cemetery area.
It was not the manner of use, nor whether the
dump would be an actionable nuisance that was relevant. It was
the very existence of the dump in the area. Every part of the
plan clearly identified the importance of the area. It could
not, save by doing violence to the plan's language, permit the
maintenance of a refuse dump there.
In regard to the National
Monuments Act, Mr. Justice McCarthy said the Commissioners of
Public Works were the guardians of the passage grave cemetery
and their consent had not been asked. It was said the use of
the quarry as a refuse pit would disturb the ground, within ,
around and near the monument.
The ground had already been much
disturbed. He thought that to the ordinary citizen the operation
of a refuse dump, with the use of an access road (which was the
only division between the present viewable passage grave and
the dump itself), was disturbing the ground in proximity to the
passage grave area.
Quite apart from this consideration, it does
not seem to me to lie in the mouth of those who would seek further
to disturb the ground, to say that whatever passage grave existed
in the area it is open season on what is left. The plaintiffs
had made out their appeal under both headings, he said. The plaintiffs
were awarded costs.
Boyne Valley Private Day Tour
Immerse yourself in the rich heritage and culture of the Boyne Valley with our full-day private tours.
Visit Newgrange World Heritage site, explore the Hill of Slane, where Saint Patrick famously lit the Paschal fire.
Discover the Hill of Tara, the ancient seat of power for the High Kings of Ireland.
Book Now