Butlers Chocolates threatened court action over Goodman plan
BUTLERS Chocolates vowed to take An Bord Pleanála to the High Court if it gave the green light to a new development on Dublin’s Nassau Street by a company backed by Larry Goodman’s family.
The ultimatum is revealed in documentation released by the appeals board on foot of its refusal of planning permission to the Goodman-backed Ternary Ltd for redevelopment plans for 17 and 19 Nassau Street.
Ternary was seeking planning permission for works to facilitate the use of the three buildings on Nassau Street as two commercial units at ground-floor level, in retail or café use and as interlinked office use on the upper floors.
The application is separate to the more substantial plans by Ternary Ltd to demolish 47, 48 and 49 Kildare Street and No 1 Nassau Street to make way for a new office development that remains before An Bord Pleanála.
Butlers Chocolates has an outlet at 18 Nassau Street.
It claimed it was not consulted by the applicant over the plan and warned the appeals board that if it decided to grant permission, a judicial review in the High Court would be sought.
Butlers Chocolates claimed that any bid by Ternary to terminate its lease would be opposed vigorously both through the planning system and the courts.
Butlers’ most recently available accounts for 2016 record revenues of €35.5m and pretax profits of €2.6m.
However, the chocolate maker and seller will have no need to go to the High Court concerning the appeals board decision after the comprehensive refusal of the plan.
It upholds a decision by Dublin City Council to refuse planning permission for the development last January.
In its ruling, the appeals board said the plan would set an undesirable precedent for similar development and would seriously injure the architectural character and integrity of the structures.
The appeals board senior planning inspector in the case, Jane Dennehy, said the issues raised in the Butlers submission relating to possible termination of its leases are matters to be resolved through the legal remit.
Ms Dennehy stressed “no party has been precluded from full participation in the planning process in connection with the current application”.
Appeals board said plan would have set undesirable precedent