Mr. Philip Jones:

I can give an example. It was a long judgment made many years ago regarding the first judicial review on the development beside St. Anne's Park in Raheny. It was a high-rise development. The inspector used the correct terminology to deal with the "appropriate assessment". For whatever reason, when the decision was made by the board members - I was not one of them - the wrong terminology was used for the appropriate assessment. That went to court. Many local residents brought a judicial review. The developer was a notice party. The board then agreed to have the decision quashed because it had used the wrong terminology in the board order, even though the inspector got it right. It had to be remitted back to the board.

Everybody spent months on this and a lot of money, but if the board had used the correct wording in its order, it would have been fine.