A High Court order, secured by Donegal County Council, has halted the continued development of a wind farm on a site that had previously been subject to a large bog slide with major environmental implications.
Mr Justice David Holland approved the order, which stops Planree Limited and Mid-Cork Electrical from completing their near-finished 19-turbine project, situated mainly on blanket bog land in Cashelnavean, Co Donegal. This halt on development is to remain in place pending any further court directive. According to Justice Holland, the companies implicated in the development have the option to seek modification or void the order, incorporated in the enforcement proceedings initiated by the local council.
Justice Holland explained that Planree and Mid-Cork Electrical have conceded that numerous divergences from their planning permissions given in 2018/2019 equate to unauthorised development. The companies plan to reach out to An Bord Pleanála to secure substitute consent to regularise these deviations, but they foresee possible lengthy delays due to existing processing backlogs.
The judge revealed that both parties concur that the wind farm operations did contribute, at least in part, to a bog slide that occurred in November 2020. However, it was acknowledged that the works performed adhered to the permission granted and there is no proof suggesting the slide was a result of negligence on the part of the developers or deviations in planning.
The developers, in an attempt to avert the court injunction, claimed that between 90 and 95% of the groundwork is already complete, with the installation of the turbines and rotors being the primary work yet to be finalised. They argued that they should be permitted to finish and operate the remaining approved elements of the wind farm, whilst waiting for the board’s decision on their application for substitute consent.
Mr Justice Holland supported the council’s viewpoint and ruled that due to 25 major deviations, the illegal development under consideration encompasses the whole wind farm and not just individual cases of deviation. He further determined that he has the authority to halt any ongoing works until the planning status is regularised.
The Judge stated the developers justified any discrepancies by arguing they were made for logical reasons or for superior environmental safeguarding. The Board’s inspector allowed the developer to seek alternative consent, noting that “the discrepancies identified were only revealed through detailed analysis […] and it’s anticipated similar complications would emerge at other major development locations”.
Justice Holland asserted the importance and weight of preserving the integrity of the planning and environmental law systems in this case. He did not believe that the undeniable public interest in wind energy contributed significantly to the decision of whether or not to issue the order.
The developers provided the EPA with an estimated report of a civil and environmental engineering specialist, reporting that approximately 86,240m³ of peat had slipped during an incident in November 2020, with around 65,740m³ entering a nearby river and depositing at European-protected locations, causing substantial environmental harm.
Justice Holland stated the location had witnessed repeated incidents of peat slides despite the developers’ vigilance and the expectations of a prior environmental evaluation, which predicted no such occurrences.
The peat slides resulted in “considerable environmental impact”, said the Judge. In June 2022, the developers admitted to contaminating the Shruhangarve and Mourne Beg waterways due to these incidents. The developers initiated a significant restoration project under the oversight of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Donegal County Council.
Both the EPA and the council acknowledged that the developers had effectively rectified the slide and its impact. Experts employed by the developer confirmed in October last year the stability of the site and its peat.
Justice Holland stated the Board should not be influenced by his ruling. He stressed his decision aims to ensure that it’s the board, not him, making any final decisions on matters concerning the application for substitute consent.