Articles filed under Legal from Europe
The Bavarian Constitutional Court today decided that the controversial 10h minimum distance requirement for wind power plants in Bavaria is in line with the constitution. Pursuant to the so called 10h-regulation (10H-Regelung) contained in the revised Bavarian Building Code, wind power plants have to maintain a minimum distance from residential housing of ten times the total height of the wind power plant.
Green, SPD and CDU, and also the wind power industry described the decision as a "black day not only for wind power, but for the transformation of energy in total." Meanwhile, the Bavarian government feels strengthened in its position. "The decision provides legal certainty," said Minister Ilse Aigner. The law "makes a public welfare an acceptable balance between our energy policy goals and local interests".
Abengoa’s financial woes trace back to Spain’s boom years, when the company began to build such projects for itself, fueled by cheaper bank loans and a desire to expand. The company took on billions of dollars of debt in anticipation of a growth rate that didn’t materialize.
The public interest in ensuring alternative non-carbon based energy sources are brought to the market cannot give this, or any other wind farm, “a licence to breach the planning laws”, he said. There is a public interest in ensuring those laws are adequately enforced and judicial failures to make mandatory orders may “dilute” effective enforcement.
The Supreme Court has agreed to consider a challenge to An Bord Pleanála’s granting of planning permission for a wind farm in Co Tipperary after ruling that the case raises issues of public importance.
In their proceedings, the applicants had sought to quash the board’s granting of a 10-year permission to ESB Wind Development and Coillte to build the wind farm. They claim the permission breaches the EU habitats directive and the EU environment impact assessment directive.
A challenge to a €120 million wind farm in Co Offaly by local residents – who claimed it would affect their mental health, property prices and the habitat of the Whooper swan – has been dismissed by the High Court.
BULGARIA - According to a ruling at the European Court of Justice today, Bulgaria is failing to protect nature and putting threatened species at risk.
The European Commission lodged the court action in October 2013, saying that large numbers of wind turbines and other developments have been authorised without adequate assessments of their environmental effects in the Kaliakra region, a migratory route and resting place for highly endangered species.
Spain's Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism (Minetur) has presented a bitter Christmas gift to solar producers. Minetur has issued a press release stating that the Constitutional Tribunal (TC) has rejected an constitutional appeal presented by the Region of Murcia regarding the removal of the feed-in tariff for solar PV in Royal Decree 9/2013.
Alex Salmond and US presidential candidate in war of words as justices reject Trump's legal challenge over 11-turbine project that will 'spoil the view' from his Scottish golf course
Siemens Public Limited Company (plc) and RWE Innogy UK Limited (RWE) were fined after 27-year-old Colin Sinclair was killed when he came into contact with the unguarded rotating shaft of a gearbox within a turbine at Causeymire windfarm.
The Supreme Court in London will withdraw the ruling in favour of MT Højgaard from 5 November, when it rejected an application from E.ON to allow an appeal against the ruling in an old dispute regarding the Robin Rigg offshore wind farm.
Inneo Torres claims that Acciona breached contracts the two had and stole intellectual property relating to how to make towers for wind turbines, according to a copy of the lawsuit. While Acciona acquired some patents relating to towers when it bought a unit of Inneo, it chose not to exercise an option that would have given it ownership of all of the technology, the complaint says.
Navitus Bay project director Stuart Grant said today: "After careful consideration, Navitus Bay has chosen not to challenge the decision by the Secretary of State to refuse consent for the proposed wind park.
Christiane Nansot, an agricultural expert, who endorsed the farmer’s grievance confirmed that the drop in milk production was caused by the 24 turbines installed by the company, next to the family farm in Le Boisle district, near Abbeville in Northern France. “The geologist said that a geographical fault in the underlying rock could be leading to amplification in waves emanating from the turbines,” she said.
Edward ‘Ned’ Buckley had agreed to a single turbine being erected on adjacent land as part of an overall €30m development of 22 wind turbines by Kilkenny–based Ecopower Developments Ltd. However, he was shocked to discover a subsequent planning application sought provision for a 75m road across his land. ...Mr Buckley conceded that he had signed a document facilitating access but said he later withdrew consent before any decision had been made.
A wind farm company has claimed that Mayo County Council and the National Roads Authority were ‘inconsistent’ in the reasons they gave for denying planning permission for eight wind turbines in bogland near Bangor Erris.
The Court rejected a judicial review of the planning consent granted for a 67 metre wind turbine to be built in Carmarthenshire, south west Wales, brought by local residents. However, it was concerned that one of the planning conditions attached to the planning permission "would permit variations in height so that the scale and impact of the turbine would be different from that for which permission was granted".
In May 2013 the Supreme Court of Justice of Portugal decided that the remaining 3 turbines had to be removed from the vicinity of Mr. R’s property. The lower court had ordered the removal of the closest turbine but allowed the other three to stay, hence the appeal to the Supreme Court. The developer is apparently appealing the decision to the European Court. ...A bittersweet victory given that Mr R’s health is ruined and the family’s way of life destroyed. Money cannot fix that sort of damage. From a legal point of view what is important is that the courts, including the Supreme Court, accepted the expert evidence of the authors of this paper concerning the terrible toll that infrasound and low-frequency noise has on both humans and animals, whilst it rejected the opposing evidence led by the wind industry lawyers.