Eoin Ó Broin (Dublin Mid West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

One of the big weaknesses with this entire section is that when we look at the start of section 160, it talks about: "When considering any application for permission under this Part, where the planning authority or the Commission is satisfied that a person to whom this section applies" but of course "a person" is not a person in the ordinary sense of the term but rather as set out in section 160(10). "A person" of course is a "legal" person.

One of the problems here is that one of the practices that is used by a certain cohort of developers is that they constitute designated activity companies, DACs, and the DAC applies for planning permission. If things then go wrong the DAC is dissolved and they are free to move on and create new DACs and therefore they have different legal personalities. What I am trying to understand in terms of section 160(10) is if there is anything in the interaction, in particular between paragraphs (a), (d) and (e) of section 160(10), that would allow a local authority, notwithstanding that somebody has used the DAC mechanism, to pursue a company under the Companies Acts, where a director might have been a director of a separate legal entity but where there is clear consistency in terms of breaches of planning from one application to another. As far back as the 1970s the Law Reform Commission argued that there should actually be a legal mechanism to go after directors. I am not of the view that it is currently provided for but I could be wrong. Could the Minister of State clarify that issue? That is the first question that I have.