DART expansion plan gets boost after High Court hears objections withdrawn
The court heard that the cases, taken by two businesses in the west of Dublin city, had been withdrawn.
The move means that the project, which last July was granted a Railway Order, the equivalent of planning permission for rail developments, is now free to proceed – pending Government funding.
Preliminary works are expected to begin next year with contracts for the more major construction projects to be awarded by the end of 2026.
DART+ West will expand the high-frequency electric train service from Dublin city to Maynooth in Co Kildare and the M3 Parkway park and ride station in Bennetstown, Co Meath.
It is one of four elements of the DART+ project which would collectively triple the length of the existing service from 50km to 150km and double hourly passenger numbers from 26,000 in each direction to 52,000.
DART+ West is expected to see some of the biggest increases in passenger numbers with a doubling of train services along the Maynooth line.
For that to happen will require works that include provision of a new station at Spencer Dock in the city centre and developments at Connolly Station, including a new entrance at Preston Street.
One other part of the project, DART+ South West, was granted a Railway Order last November.
It will extend the service from Heuston Station to Hazelhatch in Co Kildare and from Heuston to the city centre via the Phoenix Park tunnel..
ADVERTISEMENT
Learn more
An application for a Railway Order for DART+ Coastal North, which would extend services from Dublin to Drogheda, is awaiting a decision from An Bord Pleanála.
DART+ Coastal South would see increased frequency on the existing Greystones to city centre route and an application is expected to be made for it shortly.
The overall project also involves the provision of 185 new rail carriages, currently on order, with the option to order 750 in total if all aspects proceed.
The first ten carriages have arrived and are due to be put into service next year.
Early cost estimates for the complete project were put at around €3 billion several years ago but it is expected that figure will rise.
The Government has only approved funding up to contract award stage and will have to make a decision at that point whether to back the project's further progress.
The judicial review proceedings against DART+ West were taken by businesses on the Navan Road in Dublin, near Ashtown railway station.
A sitting of the High Court heard the cases had been struck out after an agreement had been reached that was satisfactory to all sides.
A spokesperson for Irish Rail said the terms of the agreement were confidential.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Extra.ie
9 minutes ago
- Extra.ie
US pharma deal can be 'creative' but Harris admits 10% tariffs are new norm
Simon Harris has said the US is open to 'creative solutions' on a pharmaceutical trade deal with the EU, sparking hope that the industry may escape Donald Trump's tariffs. While the Tánaiste conceded that US tariffs of 10% will be the 'new normal' regardless of any deal reached in the coming days, he indicated that the US is now recognising its 'interdependence' with Ireland and the EU in relation to pharmaceuticals. The comments came as EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic travelled to Washington to meet with his US counterpart, with just six days left to agree on a trade deal before President Trump imposes 50% tariffs on European imports. Maros Sefcovic. Pic: Getty Images Tánaiste and Foreign Affairs Minister Harris told the Government trade forum yesterday that despite EU efforts, 'the new normal' will be a baseline tariff of 10% on all goods being shipped to the US. But he did acknowledge ongoing negotiations to 'maximise' the number of sectors where there is a zero-for-zero tariff situation, citing aviation and pharma as two key sectors for Ireland. Irish medicinal and pharmaceutical exports were valued at €99.8billion in 2024 and accounted for almost half of our total goods exported. Of this, €44.3million was exported to the US, with many economists warning that the inclusion of the pharma sector in any tariff war would significantly damage the Irish economy. Mr Harris said he had been assured by US trade representative Jamieson Greer that the Trump administration was open when it comes to the place of pharma in an EU trade deal. Simon Harris. Pic: Pool Via 'He made it clear that he was open to creative solutions when it comes to pharma and I think that's an important recognition that actually pharma between the US and the EU, the US and Ireland, is much more interdependent than perhaps people were led to believe in certain quarters at the start of this process,' he said. Mr Harris added that while a brief extension to the July 9 deadline is something that can be considered by the EU and US, it would be preferable to, at the very least, deliver a framework agreement to provide certainty to businesses. Mr Harris and Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe also sought to reassure trade representatives that the Irish economy will continue to grow next year, even with an additional 10% US tariff. However, this growth will come at a 'lower rate than we would otherwise have expected'. Fine Gael leader Simon Harris, Helen McEntee, and Paschal Donohoe. Pic: Rolling News Mr Donohoe said: 'Our scenario for this year and for next year, on the basis of what we currently know, is that we will still have public finances that will be in surplus, that will be performing well. But as we approach the budget and conclude our work on Budget 2026, it is very likely that those levels of surpluses will be revised. They will be adjusted, but they will still be surpluses.' Asked how the global economic uncertainty might impact the country's finances, Mr Donohoe said that the Government is 'clear that if we find ourselves confronting an economic shock, we would reprioritise how we maintain capital investment, how we can invest in energy, create and build more homes'. 'That is why the work that is underway at the moment to stabilise the global trade environment is so important, and we are pushing for that work to conclude in a way that recognises and protects national interests that we have,' he said. Mr Donohoe also said that the Coalition's position will be reflected in October's budget, which will 'prioritise the creation and retention of jobs and keeping our public finances safe while investing in our future'. He said this approach will come with sacrifices. 'We will make decisions closer to the time regarding what is the way in which we will do that. And clearly, if the Government does decide to make investments and decisions in particular areas, we will then decide there are other things that we cannot do. That's the right thing to do. And we'll make the case for that on budget day,' he said. Separately, Mr Harris confirmed that a decision to defer warning labels on alcohol will be made later this week. The controversial measure was due to come into effect in May 2026; however, there have been rumblings that the plans will be shelved. Mr Harris said the policy 'came up quite a lot at the trade forum. I'm very much of the view that we need to defer the implementation. It will be a matter for the Minister for Health [Jennifer Carroll MacNeill]… but I expect we'll be able to bring clarity to this in the coming days.'
The Irish Sun
an hour ago
- The Irish Sun
Sheep farmer's ex-wife LOSES battle over £80MILLION ‘gift' he gave her for kids… after she divorced him & kept cash
A SHEEP farmer's ex-wife has lost a five-year legal battle to keep half of a £80million sum he gave her as part of a tax avoidance scheme. Clive Standish, 72, transferred the multi-million pound gift to his former partner Anna in 2017, with the intention of eventually placing the money in an offshore trust for their children. Advertisement 5 Clive Standish will keep the majority of an £80million gift he gave his wife Credit: Central News 5 It was initially decided by the High Court that Anna should receive half of the funds Credit: Champion News Clive, a former chief financial officer at UBS, made the decision to move the funds over to his Australian wife to exploit her non-dom status and avoid a crippling 40% inheritance-tax rate. The former banker believed he would face a bill of about £32 million if he died with the money in his name. But the pair's 15 year marriage later hit the rocks and divorce proceedings began in 2020 with the assets still in her name. It was initially decided by the High Court in 2023 that Anna, 57, should receive half of the funds in the settlement. Advertisement Read more News But last year, the Court of Appeal ruled that her share should be reduced from half to £25million. The amount was judged to fairly represent her contribution to raising the children and looking after their home. And despite Anna's recent attempts to overturn the decision, the ruling was upheld by the Supreme Court yesterday. Five judges argued that the sum was not a marital asset because it had not been shared by the couple and Mr Standish had intended it for their children. Advertisement Most read in The Sun Exclusive Exclusive The ruling said: 'Tax planning schemes to save tax, involving transfers of assets from one spouse to another, are commonplace. 'The problem for the wife is that there is nothing to show that, over time, the parties were treating the 2017 assets as shared between them. 'Rather, the transfer was in pursuance of a scheme to negate inheritance tax and it was for the benefit exclusively of the children. 'The parties' intention was that the £80 million should not be retained by the wife.' Advertisement Fresh twist in Eamonn Holmes & Ruth Langsford's divorce as celeb pair battle over £3.6m home His wife never established two offshore trusts as he had expected, so Clive was judged to be the sole owner of those assets when divorce proceedings began. Lord Faulks, representing Anna, tried to argue that the money had become shared property after the initial transfer, adding that she had contributed by accepting the gift. Mr Standish moved to Australia in 1976 and married Anna in December 2005, before the pair moved to the UK five years later. The couple lived together at Moundsmere Manor, an 18-bedroom mansion near Preston Candover, Hampshire. Advertisement Clive's laywer, Tim Bishop KC, explained that in June 2004 his client was worth £57.3 million, while Anna had 'no significant pre-marital wealth'. The marital assets at the time of the split amounted to £132million, almost all of which had come from Clive's initial fortune. Mr Bishop added: "The husband made the transfers in March 2017, but the wife failed to transfer the assets into trust by the time the marriage ran into problems in 2019 and then broke down finally in 2020". Delivering the Supreme Court ruling, Lord Burrows and Lord Stephens agreed with the Court of Appeal's verdict. Advertisement 5 The pair lived together at Moundsmere Manor in Hampshire Credit: Champion News Service 5 Clive moved the funds over to his Australian wife to avoid inheritance-tax Credit: Champion News Service Ltd They said: "There was no matrimonialisation of the 2017 assets because the transfer was to save tax and it was for the benefit of the children not the wife. "The 2017 assets were not, therefore, being treated by the husband and wife for any period of time as an asset that was shared between them. Advertisement "Transfers of capital assets with the intention of saving tax do not, without some further compelling evidence, establish that the parties are treating the capital asset as shared between them. "The 2017 assets comprise the husband's pre-marital assets and earnings that the husband made in the years 2004-2007, to which the wife contributed by being the home-maker and child carer during those years. "In relation to a scheme designed to save tax, under which one spouse transfers an asset to the other spouse, the parties' dealings with the asset do not normally show that the asset is being treated as shared between them. "Rather, the intention is simply to save tax." Advertisement 5 Anna's share following the Supreme Court ruling will stay at £25million Credit: Champion News
Irish Times
2 hours ago
- Irish Times
Starmer backs ‘excellent' Rachel Reeves after chancellor's tears in House of Commons
Britain's prime minister Keir Starmer said he did not appreciate how upset Rachel Reeves was in the House of Commons, because he was focused on answering prime minister's questions (PMQs). The prime minister said all people could be caught 'off guard' by their emotions, but the chancellor had to deal with it while on camera in parliament. He said she was doing an excellent job, would remain in place beyond the next general election, and that they were both absolutely committed to the chancellor's 'fiscal rules' to maintain discipline over the public finances. UK Government bonds rallied and the pound steadied on Thursday, after reassurances from the prime minister about the chancellor's future. READ MORE The sight of Ms Reeves in tears on Wednesday, and the £5 billion black hole in her public spending plans as a result of the welfare U-turn, had spooked the markets, triggering a sharp sell-off of bonds, with the yield seeing the sharpest increase since US president Donald Trump's tariff plans shook up financial markets in April. Mr Starmer told Virgin Radio he had spoken to the chancellor on Wednesday evening and she was 'fine', and her tears were as a result of a 'purely personal' matter rather than the 'ups and downs of this week'. Ms Reeves was visibly upset as she sat beside Mr Starmer in the Commons on Wednesday, but he said: 'I actually personally didn't appreciate it was happening in the chamber, because I came in, I've got questions being fired at me in PMQs, so I'm constantly up at the despatch box and down. 'I think we just need to be clear, it's a personal matter, and I'm not going to breach Rachel's privacy by going into what's a personal matter for her.' He said that 'in politics, you're on show the whole time, there's no hiding place'. Ms Reeves was a 'great colleague, she's a friend of mine and I'll be working with her for a very long time to come'. 'But like all human beings, we're also personal. 'There are moments that catch us off guard and if you're in front of a camera for large periods of your life, unfortunately, that could be caught on camera in a way, if it had been anybody else at work, it would have not really been noticed.' The sight of the Chancellor in tears on the front bench and Mr Starmer's initial lack of public support for her caused jitters about the government's borrowing plans, as Ms Reeves's commitment to her rules to control spending are a key reassuring factor for the bond markets. Mr Starmer said: 'She is an excellent chancellor, she will be chancellor for a very long time to come, into the next election and beyond it. 'She and I are absolutely committed to our fiscal rules and the economic stability that is so important to this country, and that is the rock on which we build everything else. 'On that issue, Rachel and I are in lockstep, and have been for years.' – PA
