A judge has dismissed a judicial review challenge against the award of planning permission to Vattenfall’s 77MW Clashindarroch 2 wind farm in Scotland.
Conservation group Wildcat Haven had sought to reverse the permit decision amid concerns about the development’s impact on Scottish wildcat habitats in the Clashindarroch Forest.
It argued the approval, granted last June following a public inquiry, was unlawful due to an incorrect application of mitigation hierarchy concerning how negative effects would be addressed by the developer.
The wind farm is due to be built adjacent to Vattenfall’s operational 36.9MW Clashindarroch project (pictured) in Aberdeenshire.
Following a January hearing at Edinburgh’s Court of Session, Lord Sandison today (8 February) determined Wildcat Haven had been unable to establish the decision was unlawful.
“It is clear that many interested individuals entertain reasonable and serious concerns about the effect of the proposed development on the wildcat population at Clashindarroch,” the judge wrote.
“However, it has not been established that the decisions made by the reporter and ultimately by the Ministers were attended by any error of law.
“In those circumstances there is no room for intervention by the court.”
A Vattenfall spokesperson welcomed the ruling, saying it “completely vindicates” the Scottish government’s decision to consent the project.
“Vattenfall’s wind farms are designed to both reduce carbon emissions and protect wildlife, and we have been working closely with stakeholders such as NatureScot in preparing our environmental plan for Clashindarroch 2,” they added.
“Our existing wind farm in the forest has already been generating electricity for over eight years with no negative impact on the wildcat population, where we have improved the habitat to provide further cover for the wildcats to hunt and roam.”
Wildcat Haven said in statement: “We are naturally very disappointed with the outcome of this petition to the Court of Session, as protecting wildcats at Clashindarroch Forest is such a critical part of the conservation work we do.
“We of course respect the judge’s decision. We are reviewing the decision in detail with our legal team, and will then consider our next steps.”