Judge will rule on costs of locals’ failed contempt application against waste director

A High Court judge will rule later on the costs of a failed application by residents to jail for alleged contempt a director of a waste recycling facility in a rural area of Co Offaly.

Earlier this month, Mr Justice Garrett Simons rejected an application to attach and commit to prison Aidan Doyle, a director of Guessford Ltd, trading as Oxigen Environmental, Barnan, Daingean.

A similar application against another director, Sean Doyle, did not proceed because service of court documents on him could not be proved.

Nine local residents originally brought proceedings alleging certain activities at the plant breached its planning permission.

Jacques Nienaber says Leinster got it wrong in three areas against Toulouse

---

Your top stories on Wednesday: TikTok video prompts inquiry into HSE data breaches; roadside drug tests for drivers in serious crashes

---

Michael McDowell: Irish ‘sneaking regarders’ of Trump are naive about the threat he poses to democracy

---

Darragh Ó Sé: Changing grades hasn’t worked out - the GAA needs to go back to U-18 and U-21

---

Last September, Mr Justice Simons prohibited the plant from accepting waste other than construction and demolition material, in accordance with its permission.

Subsequently, the residents brought further proceedings alleging there had been breaches of the court order and seeking the jailing of the directors.

Residents claimed that other waste, in particular wooden pallets which they contended did not constitute construction and demolition waste, continued to be accepted. A timber shredder, which was removed in February, was also used at the plant, they said.

The residents also alleged a couch, television/computer monitor and green waste had been accepted during January and February last. Anthony Murray, who lives closest to the facility but is not one of the residents who took the challenge, gave evidence about this material which the judge said fell far short of the standard of criminal proof.

The judge said Mr Murray’s demeanour in the witness box was unimpressive and his answers were evasive. When confronted with difficult questions, Mr Murray became aggressive, he said.

Mr Murray also failed to disclose that he has animus towards the company, having been prosecuted for causing criminal damage to its property by discharging a legally held firearm at a CCTV camera on the firm’s premises, the judge said.

Mr Justice Simons said that by the time the contempt application came on for hearing in May, the alleged breach of his earlier order had ceased.

On an objective interpretation, the judge said, it cannot be said that his earlier order would be clearly understood as prohibiting the receipt of wooden pallets which had come from a construction site.

Guessford/Oxigen had been in breach of the spirit of, if not necessarily the letter of, the order by continuing to shred timber until mid-February 2022, he said.

However, he continued, it would not be appropriate to exercise the court’s punitive or disciplinary contempt jurisdiction in this instance.

“The fact that compliance had been achieved only belatedly may, however, be relevant to the question of legal costs,” he said.

Following oral submissions on Friday, the judge adjourned his decision on costs to next month during which time parties can submit further written submissions, he said.