[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Get weekly updates

when your community is targeted


RSS feeds and more

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate via Stripe

Donate via Paypal

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Campaign Material

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005.

News Watch Home

Bald Hills Wind Farm ordered to stop emitting night-time noise, pay neighbours damages in landmark ruling 

Credit:  By Emma Field | ABC Gippsland | www.abc.net.au ~~

A Victorian court has ordered a wind farm in the state’s south east to stop emitting noise at night in a momentous court decision. [download the decision]

The Victorian Supreme Court today found the noise from the Bald Hills Wind Farm at Tarwin Lower created a nuisance to its neighbours ordering damages and an injunction.

John Zakula and Noel Uren took civil action against the wind farm last year, telling the court that “roaring” intermittent noise from the wind turbines caused health problems and loss of sleep.

In a precedent-setting decision, Justice Melinda Richards said the company had not complied with its noise permit conditions and ordered a permanent injunction over the wind farm, with an initial three-month period to fix the issue.

The injunction will require the Bald Hills operators to “take necessary measures to abate” emitting loud noise at night.

And if they don’t, the wind farm will not be able to operate at night.

“Bald Hills has not established that the sound received at either Mr Uren’s house or Mr Zakula’s house complied with the noise conditions in the permit at any time,” Justice Richards said.

“Noise from the turbines on the wind farm has caused a substantial interference with both plaintiffs’ enjoyment of their land.

“Specifically, their ability to sleep undisturbed at night in their own beds in their own homes.”

Damages for ‘distress’ and ‘annoyance’

The court ordered the operators of Bald Hills Wind Farm to pay the men a total of $260,000.

The court said Mr Zakula, who lives about a kilometre from one of the company’s wind turbines, is entitled to damages of $84,000 for “distress, inconvenience and annoyance”.

Mr Uren sold his property next to the wind farm in 2018, but the court said he should be paid $46,000 in damages.

Justice Richards also ordered the wind farm operator to pay aggravated damages of an additional $84,000 for Mr Zakula and $46,000 to Mr Uren.

“Bald Hills’ conduct towards both Mr Uren and Mr Zakula was high-handed and warrants an award of aggravated damages,” Justice Richards said.

The men’s lawyer Dominica Tannock believes it’s the first time in Australia, a wind farm has been ordered by a court to reduce its noise levels.

“The implications are corporate Australia will have to be very careful about complaints,” Ms Tannock said.

“If a wind farm operator receives a complaint it must act on it.

“It must act reasonably, it must act fairly, it must protect people’s sleep and if they don’t there is a precedent [now that] they can be shut down.”

A ‘momentous victory’

Her clients, and a group of other nearby residents, have battled for more than six years to get the wind farm to take their complaints seriously.

“It’s a momentous victory for my clients. They are vindicated, it has been a long battle,” she said.

“It’s not just a victory for Mr Uren and Mr Zakula but it’s for all those other people in small rural communities who are complaining and thought they could do nothing.”

Infrastructure Capital Group, which owns Bald Hills Wind Farm, said in a statement it was “currently absorbing the judgement and its implications” and would not comment on the ruling’s detail.

In her judgement, Justice Richards also made a pointed comment about the renewable energy push and the rights of neighbouring landholders.

“The generation of renewable energy by the wind farm is a socially valuable activity, and it is in the public interest for it to continue.”

She said it should not be a “binary choice between the generation of clean energy by the wind farm and a good night’s sleep for its neighbours”.

“It should be possible to achieve both.”

Source:  By Emma Field | ABC Gippsland | www.abc.net.au

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
   Donate via Stripe
(via Stripe)
Donate via Paypal
(via Paypal)


e-mail X FB LI M TG TS G Share

Tag: Complaints

News Watch Home

Get the Facts
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.


Wind Watch on X Wind Watch on Facebook Wind Watch on Linked In

Wind Watch on Mastodon Wind Watch on Truth Social

Wind Watch on Gab Wind Watch on Bluesky