High Court rejects RWE Innogy challenge to a Pickling

Pickles

Mr Justice Dove rejected a challenge brought by RWE Innogy Ltd, the energy company behind the proposal to erect the 126 metre high turbines at East Heslerton Wold, East Heslerton, Rydale, in which the energy firm hoped the judge would order Eric Pickles to reconsider the application.

Ruling that the decision should stand, the judge found that the communities secretary had adequately explained his decision and that it was not irrational.

He said: “I do not consider that there is any basis upon which it could be contended that the defendant’s decision in this case was irrational.

“The defendant has reached a different conclusion as to the appropriate weight attached to the impact on the North Yorkshire Moors National Park and he had ample material before him in order to reach that different conclusion.”

He added that the secretary of state had clearly set out the basis for his conclusion that the impact of the turbines on the nearby grade I listed St Andrew’s church in East Heslerton would be “greater than minor”.

He concluded: “The claimant’s case both in relation to the impact on the North Yorkshire Moors National Park and St Andrew’s Church is not made out, and this application must be dismissed.”

RWE is likely to face a legal costs bill from the government’s lawyers, but that issue will be dealt with later.

RWE Innogy had claimed that the secretary of state had unlawfully rejected its appeal against initial refusal by Ryedale District Council.

Pickles reached the conclusion that the total environmental effects of the scheme could not be made acceptable, but RWE claimed that he failed to take into account all the evidence, that he reached a “perverse” decision, and that he failed to give adequate reasons to explain it.

RWE Innogy UK Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. Case Number: CO/3118/2014

 

Mr Justice Dove rejected a challenge brought by RWE Innogy Ltd, the energy company behind the proposal to erect the 126 metre high turbines at East Heslerton Wold, East Heslerton, Rydale, in which the energy firm hoped the judge would order Eric Pickles to reconsider the application.
Ruling that the decision should stand, the judge found that the communities secretary had adequately explained his decision and that it was not irrational.

He said: “I do not consider that there is any basis upon which it could be contended that the defendant’s decision in this case was irrational.

“The defendant has reached a different conclusion as to the appropriate weight attached to the impact on the North Yorkshire Moors National Park and he had ample material before him in order to reach that different conclusion.”

He added that the secretary of state had clearly set out the basis for his conclusion that the impact of the turbines on the nearby grade I listed St Andrew’s church in East Heslerton would be “greater than minor”.

He concluded: “The claimant’s case both in relation to the impact on the North Yorkshire Moors National Park and St Andrew’s Church is not made out, and this application must be dismissed.”

RWE is likely to face a legal costs bill from the government’s lawyers, but that issue will be dealt with later.

RWE Innogy had claimed that the secretary of state had unlawfully rejected its appeal against initial refusal by Ryedale District Council.

Pickles reached the conclusion that the total environmental effects of the scheme could not be made acceptable, but RWE claimed that he failed to take into account all the evidence, that he reached a “perverse” decision, and that he failed to give adequate reasons to explain it.

RWE Innogy UK Limited v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government. Case Number: CO/3118/2014

 

Advertisements

About Dougal Quixote

Slightly mad. Always believes a cup is half full so continues to tilt at Wind Turbines and the politicians that seem to believe it is their god given right to ruin Scotland for a pot of fool's gold.
This entry was posted in Wind farms. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s