[ 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

Couples sue over ‘constant noise and nuisance’ from wind turbines near Wexford homes 

Credit:  Story by Tim Healy • 22 Nov 2022 • independent.ie ~~

Two couples have brought High Court damages actions over what they claim is nuisance and excessive noise from a wind farm near their Co Wexford homes.

The actions have been brought by Margret Webster and her partner Keith Rollo, as well as by Ross Shorten and Joan Carty, against Meenacloghspar (Wind) Limited, which operates the two-turbine Ballyduff Wind Farm at Kilcomb, near Enniscorthy in Co Wexford.

The plaintiffs both have properties close to the wind farm which has been in operation since 2017.

They allege that since that date they have been subjected to constant noise and nuisance which had damaged their lives, health and property value.

The claims are fully denied by the defendant, with a registered address at Stillorgan Road, Donnybrook, Dublin 4.

The cases, which are expected to take several weeks to hear, opened before Ms Justice Emily Egan on Tuesday.

In their separate action, Ms Webster and Mr Rollo seek an order requiring the defendant to cease operating the turbines and to decommission and dismantle them.

They also want an order restraining the defendant from operating the wind farm until it is constructed in a way such as to not cause undue and excessive noise, vibration and shadow flicker at their home.

The further seek a declaration that the wind farm has been operated other than in accordance with its planning permission.

They also seek damages including aggravated damages for nuisance, negligence, breach of duty and breach of their Constitutional Rights, including their rights to family life, bodily integrity and the quiet enjoyment of their home.

In their application, Mr Rollo and Ms Webster also seek to amend their action so that they may bring personal injuries claims against the defendant.

That motion is opposed.

Opening the case, John Rogers SC, for all the plaintiffs, said that Ms Webster and Mr Rollo claim that the impact of the noise, vibration and shadow flicker from the turbines has devalued their family home, which is 369 metres away from the turbines.

Their sleep has been disrupted, their anxiety levels have increased, and their overall mental health has suffered due to the noise and vibrations generated by what are “significant” pieces of electricity generating infrastructure, counsel said.

The court heard that the noise was like a cement mixer, or an aeroplane flying overhead without ever landing.

It is also claimed that the noise from the wind farm breaches one of the conditions of the planning permissions.

Mr Shorten and Ms Carty, who have an address at Grange Road, Rathfarnham Dublin, say their Ballyduff property is some 359 metres from the wind farm and they seek similar reliefs to those sought by Ms Webster and Mr Rollo.

They have also claimed that their Co Wexford home has been devalued and their rights to enjoyment of their property have been damaged by the noise, vibrations and shadow flicker from the windfarm.

In its defences against both sets of proceedings, the wind farm operator, represented by Oisin Collins SC, denies that it is responsible for any diminution of the value of the plaintiffs’ homes, that it has interfered with their constitutional rights, or that it has been negligent as alleged.

It also denies that the wind farm is being operated in breach of its planning permission.

The hearing continues.

Source:  Story by Tim Healy • 22 Nov 2022 • independent.ie

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