EXPLAINED: Council U-turn on Dundrum IPAS Centre after legal flaw exposed

Tipperary County Council has revealed that the Section 5 declaration granted for Dundrum House Hotel, which allowed the proposed IPAS centre to bypass standard planning permission, should not have been issued. The Council now concedes that the decision was based on flawed environmental information.

The development has sparked political reaction, with Tipperary TD Mattie McGrath calling for the immediate termination of the State’s contract with Utmasta Ltd, the company operating the centre. Tensions are expected to escalate further as the legal and planning implications unfold.

READ NEXT: Council admit they were wrong to give all-clear to IPAS centre in Dundrum House Hotel

In a statement release by Tipperary county council this afternoon, they have written:

An application for a Section 5 declaration, pursuant to the provisions of the Planning and Development Act 2000 (as amended), was submitted to Tipperary County Council on the 5th December 2024 on behalf of Brogan Capital Ventures Limited.

The application queried if the change of use of identified buildings within Dundrum House Hotel to use for the purposes of accommodating displaced persons or persons seeking international protection, and, use as an emergency reception and orientation centre for protected persons, was development and if so was or was not exempted development.

The Planning Authority issued a Declaration on the 10 January 2025 that the proposal constituted development and was exempted development. This decision is currently subject to a Judicial Review in the High Court.

The assessment undertaken by the Planning Section was based on the understanding that the hotel facility was discharging to the permitted and licenced waste water treatment plant on the site.

READ NEXT: Dundrum House Hotel, the Spanish company and the multi-million euro IPAS contract

The Planning Section observed in the course of a site inspection on the 5 March 2025 (for the purpose of investigating Enforcement File TUD-25-023), that a new waste water treatment system (WWTS) had been installed on the site without the apparent benefit of planning permission.

The Planning Section was notified by the Environment and Climate Action Section of the Council on the 6 June 2025 that a Section 12 Notice issued under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act 1977, as amended, to the owner of the property on the 5 August 2020 and that this was still extant.

The true position in relation to the WWTS was not known by the Planning Authority when carrying out its assessment of the Section 5 application in January 2025. As a result, the assessment of the Planning Authority proceeded on the basis of inaccurate information.

It is the belief of the Planning Authority that in light of this fact the Appropriate Assessment Screening Report that accompanied the Section 5 assessment was flawed.

As result of this deficiency, the Planning Authority has decided to concede the relief sought by the applicants to quash the Section 5 Declaration but solely on the ground that the screening carried out by the planning department was deficient. We wish to advise that Brogan Capital Ventures Limited may seek a remittal of the Section 5 to the Planning Authority or may decide to continue to defend the Section 5 Declaration.

The alleged unauthorised development on the site is being addressed by the enforcement section of the Planning Authority under TUD-25-023.