A CO GALWAY farmer has been given High Court permission to challenge the “‘residential’ zoning of his lands” that incurs a tax which he submits is in breach of fair procedures and could result in him having to sell lands.

Michael Knightly, of Dunmore, Co Galway, is asking the court to quash the zoning decision and is pursuing his case against Galway County Council, the Revenue Commissioners, Ireland and the Attorney General.

Knightly has submitted that a decision by the council to zone his land as being liable for Residential Zoned Land Tax failed to take into account reasonable considerations, was one of disproportionate interference, and was objectively biased.

He also contends that the decision was a breach of EU directives, climate policy and Constitutional justice. 

Knightly, through his barristers Michael O’Connor SC and Rita Kilroy BL, instructed by O’Dwyer LLP, Ballyhaunis, Co Mayo, states that he has actively and sustainably farmed the land for 20 years and took it on from his father.

He states that the zoning decision came under Residential Phase 1 in the Dunmore Small Growth Village settlement boundary map, as per the Galway County Development Plan 2022-2028, which made him liable for the tax.

Landowners are permitted to request a local authority to change the zoning of lands in draft or supplemental maps within the allowed period of 1 February – 1 April, 2025.

His lawyers submitted that the “thrust of the submission is that for an active farmer and in zoning the lands in such a way, [it] would result in the imposition of the tax that could potentially necessitate a sale of the lands and interference with his right to earn a livelihood”.

Knighlty states his lands were the subject of payments from the Department of Agriculture and that he participated in a scheme involved in the protection of a hedgerow habitat on his lands for wildlife conservation.

However, the council said the site was recognised for its “strategic location, full servicing and potential to support compact urban growth”.

The council said the lands were well-suited for immediate development in line with national and local policy and to re-zone to ‘agriculture’ would conflict with the council’s development plan and broader planning in the context of the housing crisis.

In later correspondence, the council wrote to Knightly that there was no appeal mechanism available in the legislation “governing the revision of the final map”.

Lawyers for Knightly, submit that the council’s decision was an “attack” on EU regulations on farm sustainability obligations and EU climate targets.

They further argue that the decision “amounts to ‘backsliding’ by prioritising development at the expense of sustainable farming and biodiversity”.

They also submitted that the council failed to assess the lack of “any real economic activity of note occurring in this rural village [Dunmore] in the past 20 years” and that there were still incomplete developments in Dunmore decades after the ‘Celtic Tiger’ era.

Ms Justice Sara Phelan granted leave for the judicial review and adjourned the matter to January.