High Court refuses to allow council to evict unauthorised caravans from site

A High Court judge has refused to give effect to a 10-year-old order allowing Tipperary County Council to ‘evict’ unauthorised mobile homes, caravans and animals from lands used as group housing for members of the Irish Traveller community.

The local authority sought permission to execute an order requiring several members of the extended O’Reilly family to remove various structures from lands known as Railway Cottages, in Powerstown, just outside Clonmel, on the grounds that the terms of a 2013 court order had been breached.

That orders required the occupants of the lands to remove any unauthorised structures, mobile homes, caravans and animals from the site.

In 2021, the council claimed, the terms of the 2013 orders were breached and three unauthorised structures, as well as horses, dogs and chickens, were being kept on the property.

Can we finally say goodbye to shaming women for letting their hair go grey?

---

Minor travel disasters and me: Ask me about how I discovered Germany had two Freiburgs

---

Midlands-North-West: Battle for final seat could end with a small party making a breakthrough

---

Robert De Niro’s raging at Trump outside courthouse was an extraordinary moment in American public life

---

Earlier this year, the Circuit Court granted the council permission to pursue enforcement of the 2013 order.

That decision was appealed to the High Court, which on Friday overturned the lower court’s decision.

Ms Justice Siobhan Phelan said she could not be satisfied that the granting of the orders sought would not amount to a disproportionate interference with the rights of the persons involved.

“No attempt had been set out in the evidence put before the court regarding the steps taken to provide Traveller-specific accommodation that vindicates a right to respect the distinct traveller identity and culture,” the judge said.

The judge did not agree with the council’s argument that the 2013 order was “created in a manner that allows for a proportional interference” with the families’ rights in their homes.

That order, the judge added, did not safeguard against their removal from the site where a patently unsuitable offer of accommodation was made to the individuals involved.

The judge said the lands have been used to accommodate members of the Irish Traveller community since the 1990s.

As well as the three houses on the property, there was a longstanding unauthorised temporary dwelling adjacent to the main site.

In 2013 the council sought orders to address problems on the site.

The judge also noted that extensive works had been carried out on the property by the council after the 2013 orders were made.

This included works to improve sanitation on the site, the removal of some 31 unauthorised structures, animals and tonnes of rubbish from the property.

It was accepted that there had been significant changes on the ground since 2013, the judge added.

In 2021 the council claimed that ‘newcomers’ had come onto the site resulting in more animals and three unauthorised caravans/mobile homes being placed on the property.

The judge said that evidence was put before the court that the site had been overcrowded.

Concerns had also been expressed for the families on the site due to social deprivation, educational disadvantage, and physical and mental health.

Many of those living there would like to move away to somewhere where they could keep their animals but claim that they have not been offered any Traveller-specific accommodation, the court said.

An offer to some of the persons involved in the action of alternative accommodation had been refused on the grounds it was not suitable to their needs, the court noted.

The judge said that the keeping of animals is integral to the identity of Irish Travellers.

The judge accepted the council had properly explained why, after a period of six years since the 2013 order was made, it had not been not enforced earlier.

This was due to the changes of circumstances on the site in recent years,.

The matter will return before the court at a later date.