Secretive Irish Climate Science Denier Group Steps Up 'Bizarre' Parliamentary Lobbying 22:27 Sep 27 0 comments EU Commission proposes new strict EU-wide rules on single-use plastics 12:29 May 29 0 comments Protecting WIldlife in Ireland from Hedge Cutting and Gorse Burning 23:37 Feb 23 0 comments WRECK THE « CLIMATE CHANCE » SUMMIT! At Nantes, France, from 26 to 28 September 2016 20:04 Jul 17 0 comments Why the corporate capture of COP21 means we must Kick Big Polluters Out of climate policy 22:47 Dec 03 3 comments more >>Blog Feeds
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail supporter? Anthony Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony Waiting for SIPO Anthony
Human Rights in IrelandA Blog About Human RightsUN human rights chief calls for priority action ahead of climate summit Sat Oct 30, 2021 17:18 | Human Rights 5 Year Anniversary Of Kem Ley?s Death Sun Jul 11, 2021 12:34 | Human Rights Poor Living Conditions for Migrants in Southern Italy Mon Jan 18, 2021 10:14 | Human Rights Right to Water Mon Aug 03, 2020 19:13 | Human Rights Human Rights Fri Mar 20, 2020 16:33 | Human Rights
Lockdown Skeptics
Government-Sponsored Agency the Global Disinformation Index is Censoring Anything Deemed ?Harmful? I... Wed Apr 17, 2024 19:00 | Will Jones
They Were Catastrophising the Climate in the 17th Century Wed Apr 17, 2024 17:00 | Guy de la Bédoyère
Why Are Psychologists Sharing Memes Mocking Their Patients on Social Media? Wed Apr 17, 2024 15:00 | Dr Kirsty Miller
Can You Game Google Scholar? Wed Apr 17, 2024 13:00 | Noah Carl
The NatCon Siege: Why is the New Elite so Terrified of a Bunch of Middle-Aged Men Spouting Mainstrea... Wed Apr 17, 2024 11:00 | Dr David McGrogan
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international editionThe cost of war, by Manlio Dinucci Wed Apr 17, 2024 04:12 | en Angela Merkel and François Hollande's crime against peace, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Apr 16, 2024 06:58 | en Iranian response to attack on its consulate in Damascus could lead to wider warf... Fri Apr 12, 2024 13:36 | en Is the possibility of a World War real?, by Serge Marchand , Thierry Meyssan Tue Apr 09, 2024 08:06 | en Netanyahu's Masada syndrome and the UN report by Francesca Albanese, by Alfredo ... Sun Apr 07, 2024 07:53 | en |
Rossport residents injuncted at behest of Shell
mayo |
environment |
news report
Tuesday April 05, 2005 13:50 by Majella Mc Carron
News from the High Court relating to Shell in Mayo For background on this case see: |
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (3 of 3)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3Court orders Mayo farmers not to obstruct Shell pipeline
Six Mayo landowners were restrained by High Court orders yesterday from interfering with the laying by Shell E&P Ireland Ltd of a gas pipeline across their lands.
The interlocutory injunctions will continue until the full hearing of proceedings brought by Shell against the six, or until a further order of the court.
The company says the €900 million Corrib gas project is intended to be commissioned in October 2007. When in full production, Shell says it is envisaged the development will provide 60 per cent of the country's gas requirements.
The gas field is 65 miles off the Co Mayo coast. It is intended that a pipeline will take the gas to land and then through a nine kilometre onshore underground pipeline to a gas reception station where it will be processed and fed into the national gas grid. The High Court hearing relates to a portion of the onshore section of the pipeline.
The action arose after the Minister for the Marine and Natural Resources made compulsory purchase orders to enable the pipeline to be constructed overland.
Shell sought restraining orders and damages when it alleged the six people obstructed its work.
The company claims there are about 30 landowners along the nine-kilometre route and 23 had consented to the work being carried out and had been compensated under an agreement with the Irish Farmers Association. Six of the remaining seven, it is alleged, physically obstructed attempts by Shell personnel to embark on work.
The restraining orders granted yesterday are against Philip McGrath, James B. Philbin, Willie Corduff, Monica Muller and BrÃd McGarry, all with addresses at Rossport South, Ballina, and against Peter Sweetman, with an address at Grosvenor Road, Rathmines, Dublin, and stated to be an occupier of Ms Muller's property.
The company had claimed that if work did not start by June 1st, it would incur substantial losses.
The six defendants had argued that it appeared there might not have been a valid consent given by the Minister for the pipeline. A recent parliamentary question had referred to an application for consent being reactivated and being presently under consideration.
In his decision yesterday, the President of the High Court, Mr Justice Joseph Finnegan, said the Minister's consent and the compulsory purchase orders were at the root of the case and raised very significant questions about property rights and concerns about the environment, planning, health and safety.
He proposed to accord to Shell a right to lay the pipes. However, the company would have to secure a further order before it had a right to use the pipes. In deciding there was a fair issue in the proceedings to be tried, the judge said he was required at this stage to presume that the statutes which conferred powers on the Minister were constitutional.
The court at this time also should take the view that the Minister and An Bord Pleanála were in a far better position than the court to decide that matters had been properly conducted, the judge added.
He gave the six defendants liberty to apply to the court and asked the company to undertake that there would be minimum interference with the defendants' rights. During the hearing over two days last month, Ms McGarry said the State had given away offshore exploration-rich territory to oil companies for a pittance.
© The Irish Times
If you have been served with an injuction requiring you to do X or to refain from doing Y then you have been enjoined to do X. or not to do Y. The same Latin root, and even in Latin there was already a difference between noun join "iunct..." and verb join "iung...". The noun came to English more directly than the verb where passage through Old French switched the "in" to "en". The change from "ng" to "n" was part of a more general language change in English still in progress, which I could have illustrated by "still goin' on".
It is a new word, part of a continually evolving language.