Library filed under Legal from Europe
An application for an offshore wind farm within view of Donald Trump’s Aberdeenshire golf resort was mishandled by government officials, his legal team has claimed.
SNP ministers have decided to ignore a ruling by one of Scotland’s most senior judges that threatens the spread of wind farms because they consider turbines to be in the “national interest”, the Daily Telegraph can disclose.
A Campaign group is calling on Highland Council to halt a Public Local Inquiry into a controversial wind farm in Easter Ross because it says it is "unlawful". The dramatic move comes just four days before a local inquiry is due to sit in Ardross to consider proposals for the 34-turbine development at Glenmorie by Wind Energy.
Scottish ministers gave Viking planning permission in April last year but judge, Lady Clark of Calton, said the Electricity Act required a developer to hold a generation licence before it could gain approval. Also, she said the minsters had failed to comply with the European Wild Birds Directive.
A tribunal in Montpellier ruled that the couple had suffered due to the “degradation of the environment, resulting from a rupture of a bucolic landscape and countryside”. It also agreed the couple had suffered from the noise of the turbines and from the flashing lights.
The Scottish government has failed to take proper account of its obligations under a key piece of European nature legislation when it gave the go-ahead for the 103 turbine Viking Energy wind farm. In her judgement Lady Clark of Calton said the government had not "meaningfully engaged" with the Wild Birds Directive 2009.
Trump filed suit in Scottish courts in an attempt to block the construction of the 651-foot turbine array that he argues will mar the view from his planned golf establishment, which is expected to be a lavish enclave of houses, hotels, ...and leisure activity facilities. ...Trump describer [Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond] as "a man whose obsession with obsolete wind technology will destroy the magnificence and beauty of Scotland."
Tribunal de Grande in Montpellier in France found that the visual and audible impacts of an operating wind facility on the owners of the Eighteenth Century Château de Flers in the northern French province of Nord-Pas-de-Calais were unreasonable and ordered the ten turbines be removed. A summary of the Tribunal's ruling is provided below. The full order can be found by clicking the link(s) on this page.
Vestas grossly misrepresented investors about its revenues on pending contracts in 2009 and 2010. Vestas continuously prided itself on the continuous rise of its order book due to rising incoming “firm and unconditional” orders. The Company kept the market closely informed about these orders and tied its own guidance for future revenues and earnings to the evolution of the backlog. However, the evolution of the order book as announced by the company cannot be matched with actual deliveries. Orders that were announced as “firm and unconditional” seem to have left the order book without having given rise to deliveries (for an amount of approximately EUR 1.4 bn).
Legal experts confirm the UNECE decision is a "game-changer" for future wind-turbine developments in the UK. David Hart, QC, an environmental lawyer, said: "This ruling means that consents and permissions for further wind-farm developments in Scotland and the UK are liable to challenge on the grounds that the necessary policy preliminaries have not been complied with, and that, in effect, the public has been denied the chance to consider and contribute to the NREAP."
Vestas has filed lawsuits against the two Indian companies embroiled in the Danish company's row with former CFO Henrik Nørremark. Vestas has filed the lawsuits in New Delhi's high court against RRB Energy and ECO RRB for the return of money handed over by Norremark, in deals that were not sanctioned by the Danish company's board.
This important ruling by the Portuguese Supreme Court determined that noise emissions from a four turbine facility had resulted in severe impacts on a family living and working nearby. A lower court recommended that the turbines suspend operations from dusk to dawn but the Supreme Count found this decision was unacceptable since the turbines made noise during the day. The court ordered suspension of the total operation of wind turbine nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 both day and night and the defendant, therefore, remove them. The defendant was also ordered to pay the plaintiffs as compensation the sum of thirty thousand euros. A portion of the ruling is provided below. The full ruling can be accessed by clinking the link(s) on this page.
The plans were granted permission by the Planning Inspectorate but a legal challenge was launched by South Northamptonshire Council when a resident claimed the inspector’s decision was unlawful on five separate grounds.
Britain's biggest onshore wind farm, in North Devon, could be operating well above permitted noise levels in every location where readings were taken, a new report claims.
A husband and wife seeking up to £2.5m ($4m) damages over turbine noise from a UK wind farm have ended their legal action after reaching a confidential settlement. Jane and Julian Davis had claimed an “unbearable hum” from the eight-turbine facility drove them out of their farmhouse in Lincolnshire, England, after turning their lives into a “nightmare”.
Corruption is defined as moral decay, and that is precisely what we are witnessing here. The fear that Denmark could lose jobs and the near religious obsession with wind power has made politicians deaf and blind to objections to wind as a source of energy, and led them to take part in the industry's fraud. The environmental and human impacts of what they are doing appear to have no effect on them.
This useful analysis examines many of the key issues raised before the Courts in the United Kingdom regarding wind turbine noise nuisance cases. An excerpt of the paper is provided below. The full report can be accessed by clicking on the link at the bottom of this page.
The Appeal Court threw out a legal challenge mounted by Rebecca and Brian Barnes against the six-turbine Armistead farm at Old Hutton. The pair claimed it would blight the landscape, cause a noise nuisance and put their three children at risk.
A French court has ordered one of the country's leading developers and owner-operators of wind power to remove four turbines from a 17.85MW facility in south-west France, because they cause "exceptional neighbourhood disturbance."
This important case before le tribunal de Montpellier has resulted in a decision ordering La Compagnie du Vent to dismantle 4 of the 21-turbines sited near Névian, France. The judge also awarded damages of €500,000 to the family which brought the case to compensate for the nuisance caused and the estimated loss in value of their property, which is situated 650 meters from the nearest turbine. A rough translation of the ruling is provided below. The full ruling, in French, can be accessed by clicking the link(s) on this page.