Wind farm opponents’ complaint lacked proof: judge

A group of landowners in Simcoe County, Ontario, was unsuccessful in using the courts to prevent the construction of a wind farm in their area. The group sued the company that would construct the project, wpd Canada Corporation, as well as the farmers who own the land on which the project is proposed to be built.

The Fairview Wind Project is described as an industrial wind farm with a capacity to generate 18.4 MW of electricity. The landowners wanted the court to grant an injunction to prevent construction, and to award “compensatory damages” of $16.6 million for loss of property value, negligence, nuisance and other complaints. The case was dismissed without a trial, the judge ruling that the plaintiffs were unable to prove that they had a cause of action.

The contract for the project was awarded under the Ontario Power Authority’s Feed-in Tariff program (FIT) in May, 2010. The landowners claimed that as soon as Fairview Wind Farm issued public notice of the project, as required by law, the value of their property fell and they were put at risk of negative health effects from the proposed wind turbines.

However, the court ruled that these claims were entirely speculative, especially given that the project had not yet begun construction. Since the plaintiffs in the case couldn’t prove that their land had lost value, there could be no compensation. A legal blogger at Dale & Lessman LLP wrote that opponents of wind farms should be sure that they can prove their claims of damages due to wind farm developments in future if they intend to initiate a legal action. Otherwise they risk the same result as in the Fairview case. Legal costs, which are generally borne by the unsuccessful litigant, could be in the range of hundreds of thousands of dollars.

According to the legal blog, the court in this case left open the possibility for the plaintiffs to sue the wind developer again, if there is concrete evidence to support their claims. For that, there must be a “high degree of probability” that the alleged harms will in fact occur.

Did you miss this?

Other Popular Stories

  • Transportation workers urge quick response to Lac-Megantic report
  • Bombardier, NetJets launch new Challenger 350
  • LED bulb manufacturer receives R&D funds from Ottawa
  • Low oil prices not a serious threat to Canada's economy: RBC
  • MRO contract of $423 million for Canada's CC-130 Hercules fleet
  • Industry mostly positive about government's infrastructure spending plans
  • Ontario on track to lead country in employment, economic growth
  • Airline debacle highlights need for businesses to be tech smart
  • Regional LNG plant approved in Quebec
  • Steel producers, clean tech, IT see reason to support the federal budget
  • Zinc-air battery shows great promise in search for energy storage
  • Canada's energy sector "at a crossroads," risks falling behind
  • Grid-scale electricity storage solution from New York startup
  • The world's largest carbon capture plant opens in Iceland — will pull 4,000 metric tons per year
  • USC Students Blast Rocket Speed and Height Records
  • Did Amazon Just Perform the Largest Launch Vehicle Acquisition in History?
  • Consumer spending drives strong GDP growth in second quarter
  • Geosynthetics and clean technologies – preventing contamination, reinforcing terrain and preventing erosion
  • Joint venture to develop infrastructure for LNG as vehicle fuel
  • SWISS inaugurates commercial flights of Bombardier's CS100
Scroll to Top