Appeal granted in Mullaghglass landfill case

A resident living near a now-decommissioned landfill has been granted an appeal over how regulators managed smells and "noxious" gases from the site.

The Court of Appeal had previously dismissed a bid by Noelle McAleenon for a judicial review.

But the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that it was incorrect to do so and that the case should return to the Court of Appeal to be heard on merits.

Ms McAleenon said she was "thrilled" about the ruling.

The Mullaghglass landfill site, in County Antrim, stopped accepting waste in late 2022 and was closed in spring 2023.

Local people have claimed that smells from the site affected their health.

According to Ms McAleenon, from early 2018, she and her family suffered physical symptoms such as headaches, nausea and stomach problems caused by odours and noxious gases emanating from the site.

Following the Supreme Court's decision, she said: "I hope to continue my case at the Court of Appeal and that it will help ensure that my family and neighbours are protected from air pollution and its effects."

Mullaghglass is operated by Alpha Resource Management Limited, and is regulated by Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA).

The Supreme Court heard that it is Ms McAleenon's case that the regulators failed to exercise their powers to take action to require the operator of the site to manage the site more effectively and to eliminate the odours and fumes which affected her and her family.

Her application for judicial review was previously dismissed by judges who said it had "no further utility", given the site was closing.

They also contended that Ms McAleenon could have brought a private prosecution or a civil claim against the operator of the site.

Delivering the Supreme Court judgement today, Lord Justice Stephens said the central issue was whether the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that Ms McAleenon's application for judicial review should be refused on the basis that she had an "adequate alternative remedy".

He said: "While Ms McAleenon's overall objective was that noxious gases be prevented from escaping from the site, her immediate aim was to compel the defendant regulators to fulfil what she maintained were their public law duties.

"The judicial review procedure was appropriate for this and the actions against Alpha would not address this issue nor give a remedy in relation to it.

"The fact that she could have brought other proceedings of a different nature directed against another party in which different issues would arise did not mean that she had a suitable alternative remedy in relation to the claim she wished to bring.

"It is for a claimant to choose which form of claim to bring and against which party."

Lord Justice Stephens said the Court of Appeal was "incorrect" to conclude that a prosecution against Alpha or a civil claim was an adequate remedy.

He said the Supreme Court "unanimously allows the appeal".