Challenging a bord pleanala decision

Does anyone have any experience of challenging a decision of An Bord Pleanala? We were granted permission by the Council, a neighbour objected to An Bord Pleanala and the Inspectors report recommended refusal.
We were shocked as were our engineers etc. What is galling is that the inspectors report is littered with material errors eg incorrect site address and a site description that doesnt tally with the the actual field.
The inspectors sole basis for rejection was that the field was soaking wet on the day in question and she thought that "the field would be wet all year round". We checked with met eireann and on the day she visited there was absolutely exceptional rain fall at the nearest met station and the month in question was also exceptional in terms of rain fall. By a similar logic had she called on a day with snow she could have concluded that the place is permanently ice-bound!
Her findings take no notice of percolation tests etc.
We wrote to ABP pointing out all the errors but I have been told that basically I was wasting my time. Anyone know whether we can make a legal challenge to the decision?

Basically, the only appeal from An Bord Pleanala is to the High Court, which will involve major expense and, frankly, little chance of success.

I lost a case in An Bord Pleanala at one point, and was annoyed enough to get legal advice about what steps were available. I got referred to a barrister who specialises in planning matters, and he basically told me I could go to the High Court, but not to bother.. the High Court generally pays great deference to An Bord Pleanala, and will very rarely intervene.

Echoing AlanP's comments - the High Court wants to prevent too many applications coming from ABP, and will almost always defer to it.

I suggest that you do make another application to the Local Authority - point out the errors in the application. It is likely to be refused, but you can then take it a second time to ABP, where you will at least be given the opportunity to comment on those factual errors.