Belfast station Irish signage decision to be challenged at judicial review

A judge has granted permission for a judicial review on the decision by a Stormont minister to install Irish language signage at Belfast’s Grand Central Station.

Mr Justice Scoffield said the challenge against Infrastructure Minister Liz Kimmins taken by loyalist activist Jamie Bryson had crossed the “arguability threshold” to merit a judicial review hearing.

Under Stormont rules, ministerial decisions that are deemed significant or controversial should be considered collectively by the powersharing coalition, rather than by an individual minister.

Controversial

Mr Bryson contends Ms Kimmins should have brought the issue of installing Irish language signs at the new Belfast transport hub to the wider Executive for decision because it was a “controversial” matter.

At a hearing at Belfast High Court on Friday, Mr Justice Scoffield granted Mr Bryson leave for a judicial review, which will take place in September.

The planned £150,000 project to install the signs has been paused until October pending the outcome of the legal challenge.

Sinn Fein minister Ms Kimmins gave the go-ahead for the signage in March, but her announcement sparked a row with other ministers.

The DUP insisted she had a “legal duty” to bring the decision to the wider Executive.

As part of his legal challenge, Mr Bryson submitted to the court correspondence and statements he had secured from DUP leader Gavin Robinson, Ulster Unionist peer Lord Elliott, TUV leader Jim Allister, PUP leader Billy Hutchinson and Grand Secretary of the Orange Order Mervyn Gibson on the issue of the signs.

‘Bizarre’

He also referred to public comments by DUP deputy First Minister Emma Little-Pengelly when she said it was “bizarre” to suggest the issue was not controversial.

The activist said the evidence offered a “powerful indication” that the matter was controversial and, as such, should have been referred to the Executive.

Urging the judge to grant leave, Mr Bryson insisted his application “pole-vaults over the threshold” to merit a judicial review.

In March, TUV MLA Timothy Gaston sought support from other Assembly members for a petition to refer the decision to the Executive for a discussion.

The petition required 30 MLA signatures to succeed but ultimately Mr Gaston was the only member of the house to sign it.

Arguing against leave, Tony McGleenan KC, representing the Department for Infrastructure, said the failure of the petition showed there was not a “flicker of controversy” about the decision within the Assembly.

“It registered a nil return in terms of controversy,” he told the judge.

Mr Bryson insisted the failure of the petition was not evidence of a lack of controversy. He said a successful petition would only have required Executive ministers to have a discussion on the signage issue and would not have compelled a wider Executive vote on the matter.

He said the reason that DUP MLAs did not sign the petition was because the party’s ministers had already secured a discussion on the matter by raising it under “any other business” at an Executive meeting at the start of April.

In outlining his decision to grant leave, Mr Justice Scoffield cited Ms Little-Pengelly’s comments and Mr Robinson’s letter.

He said Mr Bryson had offered enough evidence to cross the threshold for holding a judicial review.

“It does seem to be there’s enough in the applicant’s case to get over the threshold at this stage,” he said.

The case will be reviewed again next month ahead of the full hearing, which is expected to last one day, in September.