A5 WTC (New Road from Aughnacloy to Derry)

[WeeDonns]

I see Liz Kimmins has indicated that there will be an appeal.  Always possible that McAlinden J got the law wrong but given the content of the Judgement I am surprised by this course of action.  Particularly as they have started to return the land and remove all the equipment/

Could an appeal delay the return of land etc?
As someone has pointed out above, that process is going to cost a fortune ... a process that is then going to be reversed again in the future (hopefully) when DfI get their application sorted?

[sensethetone]

Wonder will the climate change issues that's stopping the A5 stop the gold miners?

[tiempo]

Wonder will the climate change issues that's stopping the A5 stop the gold miners?

Cemtex for them boys surely

[armaghniac]

https://www.msn.com/en-ie/money/other/we-asked-northern-ireland-political-parties-what-they-are-going-to-do-to-make-sure-the-new-a5-road-finally-gets-built-this-is-what-they-said/ar-AA1HM11z

[David McKeown]

I see Liz Kimmins has indicated that there will be an appeal.  Always possible that McAlinden J got the law wrong but given the content of the Judgement I am surprised by this course of action.  Particularly as they have started to return the land and remove all the equipment/

Could an appeal delay the return of land etc?
As someone has pointed out above, that process is going to cost a fortune ... a process that is then going to be reversed again in the future (hopefully) when DfI get their application sorted?

I'm not sure why the return of lands happened that wasn't the focus or an outcome of the original decision (unless I missed it)

[trileacman]

I see Liz Kimmins has indicated that there will be an appeal.  Always possible that McAlinden J got the law wrong but given the content of the Judgement I am surprised by this course of action.  Particularly as they have started to return the land and remove all the equipment/

Could an appeal delay the return of land etc?
As someone has pointed out above, that process is going to cost a fortune ... a process that is then going to be reversed again in the future (hopefully) when DfI get their application sorted?

I'm not sure why the return of lands happened that wasn't the focus or an outcome of the original decision (unless I missed it)

The original decision struck out the vesting orders, therefore DFI, in the eyes of the law, are trespassing on land they don't own.

[David McKeown]

I see Liz Kimmins has indicated that there will be an appeal.  Always possible that McAlinden J got the law wrong but given the content of the Judgement I am surprised by this course of action.  Particularly as they have started to return the land and remove all the equipment/

Could an appeal delay the return of land etc?
As someone has pointed out above, that process is going to cost a fortune ... a process that is then going to be reversed again in the future (hopefully) when DfI get their application sorted?

I'm not sure why the return of lands happened that wasn't the focus or an outcome of the original decision (unless I missed it)

The original decision struck out the vesting orders, therefore DFI, in the eyes of the law, are trespassing on land they don't own.

I misunderstood the position on vesting. The vesting was contingent on the decision to proceed with the road being lawful so whilst the vesting themselves weren't unlawful per se, the quashing of the original decision has in effect voided them ab initio. Hence why the land is being returned. Had missed that bit which in my defence was early on in the Judgement.

[LC]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgv5wnd9gjo

Is this not a complete waste of and more driven by optics?

I am no legal expert but I got the impression the previous ruling was a penalty kick so to speak.

[Hereiam]

https://wesleyjohnston.wordpress.com/2025/07/21/key-consequences-of-the-a5-legal-challenge/

Wesley Johnston explains it well here.

[David McKeown]

https://wesleyjohnston.wordpress.com/2025/07/21/key-consequences-of-the-a5-legal-challenge/

Wesley Johnston explains it well here.

Not sure he does. I don't think he's actually understood the judgement from a legal perspective. Clearly doesn't understand the status of unincorporated international treaties of the supremacy of Parliament.

[David McKeown]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgv5wnd9gjo

Is this not a complete waste of and more driven by optics?

I am no legal expert but I got the impression the previous ruling was a penalty kick so to speak.

I'm surprised at it not because it was a water tight judgement or anything but because the judgement basically said that it would be very easy to fix the flaws in the original process and just retake the decision. I would have thought that would be easier but there may also be strong grounds to appeal.

[seafoid]

https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/business/northern-ireland/companies-which-have-made-millions-from-delayed-a5-road-scheme/a7817510.html

The companies which have earned millions of pounds from the long-delayed A5 road scheme can today be revealed.
In one case, an infrastructure firm received more than £60m in consultancy fees.

Another contractor company has collected over £20m.

The total spend to date on the project - which was originally given the go-ahead in 2007, but has yet to start - has topped £150m.

The 58-mile road from Derry to Aughnacloy, Co Tyrone, has been hit by a series of delays.

It was approved again by the Executive in October last year, with the final cost now estimated at £1.7bn.

However, spending on the project has continued to rise, and now stands at £153.7m.

This includes £80.6m on consultants, £56.3m on contractors' fees, £5.8m on geotechnical and archaeology investigations and £5.7m on land costs.


In response to a Freedom of Information request, the department has now revealed the biggest earners from the scheme.

In our request, we asked for a list of those who had received £1m or more.

The biggest recipient is Mouchel Limited, which was later acquired by the WSP Group. Mouchel/WSP has received £63.8m in consultancy fees - more than a third of the total expenditure to date.

Three sets of contractors' fees were paid out to companies which collaborated at various stages of the project.

Around £11m was paid as part of a joint venture between Balfour Beatty, BAM and FP McCann for section one of the scheme, between New Buildings and Sion Mills.


A further £20.5m was shared between Roadbridge, Sisk and PT McWilliams. Part of this was also a joint venture including John Sisk & Son Ltd for section two, from Sion Mills to Omagh.

And £16.5m was paid out related to section three, between Omagh and Aughnacloy, as part of a joint venture between Graham and Farrans.

Meanwhile, British Telecom received £2.3m for "utility services".

Soil Mechanics received £2.4m and Glover Site Investigations Ltd received £1.1m - both for geotechnical work.

There is no suggestion that fault lies with these companies, which took on work in good faith and the expectation the project would proceed on time.

SDLP MLA Daniel McCrossan said the cost could not continue to spiral, and called for work to start immediately.

Daniel McCrossan
Daniel McCrossan

"It's regrettable that such large sums have been spent before work has even started on the A5, but our full focus needs to be on getting to a position where work can begin and this money invested can start to show its benefit," he said.

"A project of this size and importance was always going to come with significant costs, but we cannot put a price on saving lives and keeping people safe.

"That's why the Executive and Infrastructure Minister need to ensure there are no further delays and work can finally begin next year."

The current A5 is one of the most dangerous roads in Ireland. More than 50 people have been killed on it since 2006.

[armaghniac]

This may be one of the longest lasting threads on Gaaboard.

[Munchie]

I'd say Casement will outlast it.

[Aristo 60]

As will the United Ireland Opening up the discussion - 300 odd pages in and we are still only opening the discussion