President of the Law Society, Rosemarie Loftus, said the proposals, if implemented, represent a significant setback for fairness and legal accountability: “These proposals will prioritise money over merit. If implemented, they will not deter cases with questionable merit so long as the individual, or group, taking the case has significant financial resources. However, these proposals will impact on cases of genuine merit if the individual, or group, taking the case does not have significant financial resources.

“Access to justice must be a universal right and not one that is determined by the financial means of those bringing it. The proposed scale of fees risks closing the doors of the courts to individuals and community groups seeking to challenge potentially unlawful planning or environmental decisions. This measure would be a regressive step and would weaken the rule of law and erode essential democratic safeguards.”

Judicial reviews play a vital role in upholding environmental standards, ensuring that public authorities comply with national and EU law when making planning or environmental decisions.

The Law Society notes that there is no evidence that judicial review actions delay housing or infrastructure delivery. In 2025, judicial review cases declined by 19%, directly contradicting claims of ‘rapid growth’ in litigation. It is also important to highlight that there is no data demonstrating that fee caps are an effective or proportionate solution.

The Law Society warns that these proposals would make representation in complex environmental cases financially unsustainable, limit access to expert witnesses and discourage members of the public from engaging legal representation. The proposed fee caps would threaten the fairness and equitability of the procedure by placing the State in an advantageous position over citizens and community groups.

The Law Society further cautions that mandatory maximum fee scales could have anti-competitive effects and breach EU law. It is also concerning to note that the scale of fees model proposed for adoption in Ireland mirrors aspects of the scale of fees that is in place in England and Wales – a system that is currently under scrutiny for non-compliance with the Aarhus Convention.

“We urge the Government to instead look at more effective alternative measures, such as developing internal appeals mechanisms or introducing non-binding cost guidelines to promote efficiency and early settlement, without limiting access to justice or weakening the independence of the legal profession.”