Tesco gets court approval for new store in North

A new Tesco store on the Belfast-Bangor road at Knocknagoney was given the all clear yesterday to open next month as planned.

A new Tesco store on the Belfast-Bangor road at Knocknagoney was given the all clear yesterday to open next month as planned.

In the High Court Mr Justice Kerr dismissed an application for judicial review of the decision to grant planning permission. The application was brought by the developers of an adjacent project across the road from the Tesco site.

The judge said he was exercising his discretion to refuse to quash planning permission because of the imminence of the opening and the £13 million already incurred by Tesco's.

"A number of employees have already been engaged and the prejudice to Tesco's, its prospective employees and the public is very considerable," said Mr Justice Kerr.

READ MORE

Afterwards Mr Eric Bowen, director of Tesco Northern Ireland, said: "We are naturally delighted and I think everyone would agree that it really was a victory for common sense.

"We were granted lawful planning permission. We built our store accordingly and now will open as planned.

"I am sure the hundreds of people whom we have already employed and all our new customers will be clearly pleased."

The application for judicial review was brought by promoters of the proposed £65 million Harbour Exchange development on the opposite side of the road.

The applicants - Anglia and General, Aquis Estates, and landowners Belfast Harbour Commissioners - took legal action after their planning permission was quashed in July when Mr Justice Kerr ruled that senior civil servants failed to furnish Environment Minister Lord Lords with all the relevant information.

In their application they sought to establish that a similar error was made when planning permission was granted to Tesco's.

Mr Justice Kerr said it was clear the Minister failed to take account of a relevant matter and added: "It was argued that I should grant a declaration that the planning permission was invalidly obtained. I do not consider that this is appropriate.

"It should be clear that, but for the expenditure on the development and imminence of the opening, I would have acceded to the application for judicial review.