High Court dismisses judicial review challenge against 579ft-high wind farm in Clare
THE HIGH COURT has dismissed objectors' judicial review challenge against the green light for a 579ft-high eight-turbine wind farm for lands in south-east Clare.
More than 300 people from the area lodged objections against the Fahy Beg wind farm proposal and Clare County Council refused planning permission to RWE Renewables Ireland Ltd for the 38.4 MW wind-farm on lands 1.5km from Bridgetown, and 3.5km from O'Briensbridge in south-east Clare in May 2023.
As part of the proposal, the wind-farm developers are to establish a Community Benefit Fund which will distribute up to €3.12m over the first 15 years of the wind farm.
Documents lodged with the application state that the provision of the Community Benefit Fund 'will have a significant long-term, positive effect on the socio-economic profile of the study area and wider area'.
The Council refused across five grounds including that the planned wind farm would depreciate the price of property as it would be visually over-bearing on those properties.
However, RWE Renewables Ireland appealed and An Bord Pleanala overturned the Council refusal to grant planning permission in March 2024.
In response, the Fahybeg Windfarm Opposition Group and Sean Conway launched High Court judicial review proceedings seeking to have the appeals board decision quashed for the wind farm which is to be located on a site 14km north of Limerick city.
Advertisement
However, Justice Richard Humphreys – who presides over the Planning and Environment Division of the High Court – has dismissed all grounds of the judicial review challenge.
The applicants claimed that the decision should be quashed as the planned wind farm would materially contravene the Development Plan due to the loss of part of Ballymoloney Woods.
Justice Humphreys stated that on the basis of the applicants' analysis, the felling of any tree necessarily constitutes a material contravention of the Development Plan.
Justice Humphreys stated that this approach represented an 'excessively literalist and absolutist interpretation' of development plan objectives.
Justice Humphreys stated that the application failed to engage with the specifics of the individual trees which are actually being felled, pointing 0.4 of a hectare or, or 0.2% of the total amount of long established woodland is being removed.
He said: 'There is no absolute prohibition on the removal of trees, contrary to the applicants' complaints, and a reasonably informed reader would not read such a preclusion into the Development Plan when same is read objectively and holistically.'
Justice Humphreys also dismissed the objectors' claim that planning permission should be quashed due to the impact that the wind farm would have on property prices in the area.
He said that there is no substantive evidence presented that would conclusively indicate a depreciation in property values directly attributable to the wind farm's presence at this particular location.
Justice Humphreys made no order in relation to costs.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Independent
11 hours ago
- Irish Independent
Regulator takes proceedings against Sky Ireland
The case, lodged in the High Court, seeks an order compelling Sky to tell customers in a prominent way when a fixed contract is going to be automatically renewed, and to do this at least a month in advance. Sky has said it does not believe that ComReg is interpreting the relevant European regulation correctly, and is preparing to defend its position. In a statement to the Irish Independent today, ComReg confirmed it has issued proceedings in relation to the alleged contravention by Sky Ireland of Regulation 89.6 of the EU's electronic communications code. These came into force in 2022. ComReg said it has sought a restraining order requiring Sky 'not to repeat the contravention of Regulation 89 (6)' and also requiring it to 'refrain from not informing customers in a prominent and timely manner before a fixed duration contract is automatically prolonged, being not less than one month before the prolongation date, and on a durable medium, of the end of contractual commitment and of the means by which to terminate the contract'. A durable medium is defined as a paper record, but could also be interpreted as an email. The regulator is also seeking an order requiring Sky to 'refrain from not providing consumers with their best tariff advice' before a contract is automatically renewed, and to 'refrain from failing to provide consumers with their best tariff information at least annually after the automatic prolongation of their contract'. Asked to respond, a Sky spokesperson said: 'Sky takes its regulatory obligations very seriously and complies with all relevant laws in each of the markets in which it operates. 'In this instance, ComReg and Sky differ in their legal interpretation of Regulation 86 (9) of the European Electronics Communication Code. We look forward to outlining our arguments in this regard in due course.' This is not the first time Sky has come into conflict with the regulator. Two years ago it paid ComReg €54,000 for failing to put consumer references on all bills. These are the numbers needed when someone wants to switch provider. ComReg said Sky paid the fine instead of facing prosecution. A number of customers had contacted the regulator to report difficulties switching from Sky due to a lack of information. In 2019, Sky Ireland and ComReg settled a High Court dispute over broadband charges. The regulator had changed the rules around how Eir charged other telecos for using its network. Eir was allowed to charge rivals such as Sky up to €170 every time a customer moved from one supplier to another. Sky challenged the ruling, arguing that mistakes had been made in the decision. The case was settled after ComReg said it would consult with telecos over the issue.
Irish Examiner
17 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
State to lose tax revenues as people move to electric vehicles but missed climate targets will cost us
Tax revenues could fall by as much as the Universal Social Charge brings in each year as more people switch to electric vehicles and renewable energy sources, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council has warned. However, the budgetary watchdog has warned that missing key climate transition targets would be much costlier and could amount to €5,000 for every person in the country. In its biannual Fiscal Assessment report, the Council warned that the Government's two-year forecast horizon is much too short, and the twin challenges of an ageing population and the climate transition cannot be adequately prepared for. In relation to climate change, the Council estimated that 'reasonably manageable' spending increases of approximately €2bn per year will be required to achieve the necessary transitions. However, they said a bigger challenge will be to replace the taxes likely to fall away as people shift to cleaner transport and energy. The Council said the current tax system would raise far less revenue in a future where electric vehicles and renewable energy become the norm. If today's tax system was left unchanged, they said the fall in annual revenues would amount to €5bn in today's money, almost as much as the USC tax raises. While the climate transition raises challenges for tax revenues, the Council warned that doing nothing has substantial costs. "If Ireland fails to reduce its emissions, as it currently looks set to by a wide margin, it may have to transfer an enormous amount of money to neighbouring countries," the report states, with the government required to purchase transfers or credits from other countries, the costs of which could be extremely high. The Council estimates that the costs of missing climate targets could reach as high as €26bn. "A transfer of as much as €26bn would be a colossal waste of taxpayers' money — equivalent to almost €5,000 for every person in Ireland," the report warns. "Instead of transferring this money to neighbouring countries, the government should take more effective action to avoid these costs, reduce energy costs and pollution, and improve people's health." In relation to Ireland's ageing population, the report said that action taken sooner rather than later will ultimately be less costly. "While other countries are experiencing ageing populations, Ireland is facing a more rapid change," the report states, warning that by 2057, one in three people will be over the age of 65, putting more demand for healthcare, long-term care and pensions. It will also mean slower growth in the economy and hence in tax revenues. The Council said the steps taken by the Government should have an impact. The Future Ireland Fund has been established as a way of saving the 'extraordinary' corporation taxes being collected. The Government has planned gradual increases in Pay Related Social Insurance (PRSI) to help fund increased spending needs. "Modelling by the Council suggests that the Future Ireland Fund could make a substantial dent in ageing costs, covering more than half of the rise in annual spending associated with ageing between 2023 and 2041 and a quarter by 2050," the report states. "On their own, these measures will still not fully offset costs associated with ageing. However, they are an important part of the solution to dealing with these costs, which will fall much more heavily on the next generation of taxpayers."
RTÉ News
a day ago
- RTÉ News
High Court dismisses challenge against Clare wind farm
The High Court has dismissed objectors' judicial review challenge against the green light for a 579 ft high eight turbine wind farm for lands in south east Clare. Over 300 people from the area lodged objections against the Fahy Beg wind farm proposal and Clare County Council refused planning permission to RWE Renewables Ireland Ltd for the 38.4 MW wind-farm on lands 1.5km from Bridgetown, and 3.5km from O'Briensbridge in south-east Clare in May 2023. As part of the proposal, the wind-farm developers are to establish a Community Benefit Fund which will distribute up to €3.12m over the first 15 years of the wind farm. Documents lodged with the application state that the provision of the Community Benefit Fund "will have a significant long-term, positive effect on the socio-economic profile of the study area and wider area". The council refused across five grounds including that the planned wind farm would depreciate the price of property as it would be visually over-bearing on those properties. However, RWE Renewables Ireland appealed and An Bord Pléanála overturned the council refusal to grant planning permission in March 2024. In response, the Fahybeg Windfarm Opposition Group and Sean Conway launched High Court judicial review proceedings seeking to have the appeals board decision quashed for the wind farm which is to be located on a site 14km north of Limerick city. However, Mr Justice Richard Humphreys - who presides over the Planning and Environment Division of the High Court - has dismissed all grounds of the judicial review challenge. The applicants claimed that the decision should be quashed as the planned wind farm would materially contravene the Development Plan due to the loss of part of Ballymoloney Woods. Mr Justice Humphreys stated that on the basis of the applicants' analysis, the felling of any tree necessarily constitutes a material contravention of the Development Plan. Mr Justice Humphreys stated that this approach represented an "excessively literalist and absolutist interpretation" of development plan objectives. Mr Justice Humphreys stated that the application failed to engage with the specifics of the individual trees which are actually being felled, pointing 0.4 of a hectare or 0.2% of the total amount of long established woodland is being removed. He said: "There is no absolute prohibition on the removal of trees, contrary to the applicants' complaints, and a reasonably informed reader would not read such a preclusion into the Development Plan when same is read objectively and holistically." Mr Justice Humphreys also dismissed the objectors' claim that planning permission should be quashed due to the impact that the wind farm would have on property prices in the area. He said that there is no substantive evidence presented that would conclusively indicate a depreciation in property values directly attributable to the wind farm's presence at this particular location. Mr Justice Humphreys made no order in relation to costs.
