The Dublin Road is to get its 15th licenced premises soon, after an application to add an off-licence to a supermarket was upheld in the District Court this week (September 2 ).
Seeking the change of use certificate since last July was John McNeill from the Londis convenience store opposite the AIT, who wished to convert the wine licence in his premises to allow him sell beer and spirits.
He had been challenged in this application by the owners of the Next Door off-licence next door who argued through barrister John Hogan that, apart from having two off-licences in a four-unit shopping centre, the road was “flooded with similar premises”.
At the last court date on July 15, the Next Door legal team had argued that the landlord of Londis had not given explicit consent for a change of use, despite Mr McNeill claiming so.
However, this week in court, McNeill was able to present documentation supporting this.
In another attempt to derail the application, Mr Hogan argued that McNeill had lodged his memorandum of association (a business registration document ) with the Companies’ Registry Office [on July 23] after applying for the change of use [on July 15].
However, Judge John Neilan ruled that to discover what was instructed to be included in the memorandum of association woud be to impinge on the client-attorney privilege.
“They [the company directors] must’ve sought professional advice and I’m not prepared to go behind that,” he said.
“Any citizen of this State can rely on members of the legal profession for advice. The High Court would agree it would be inappropriate for me to go behind that and enquire what was said between the applicant and his solicitors.”
Mr Hogan then sought to to dismiss the application on grounds of adequacy, or how the appropriate needs of the neighbourhood were provided for with this type of business.
He pointed out the number of licenced premises (15 pubs and off-licences ) between Kilmartins roundabout and Dunnes Stores on John Broderick Street, and suggested the road was “flooded with similar premises” but Judge Neilan did not accept this.
“The village of Ballaghadereen up to the 1970s had 72 licences,” he pointed out. “What was their population? What would’ve been adequate for that town? It would be easy for the legislature to decide what would be adequate...but they’ve been leaving it to the courts since 1992. There’s yawning gaps.”
Concerning the gap in time between the lodging of the memorandum of association and the application for the new licence, Judge Neilan felt backdating was “not fatal” to the application.
On the issue of adequacy: “Economics should not be the influencing factor,” he ruled.
“We have fairly debated the word ‘adequate’. The application is granted.
