Terror tactics

Wind companies ask court to make families who challenged industrial wind turbines pay

It’s a warning to anyone considering a legal fight with a giant industrial wind energy developer, say four families, after they learned three large wind companies are demanding they pay hundreds of thousands of dollars toward legal bills.

The developers—KT, Armow and St. Columban—say the homeowners knew the risks. They lost. Now they have to pay.

The Drennan family, along with the Ryans, Dixons and Kroeplins, live in the rural countryside near Goderich, in western Ontario. Soon, there will be 140 industrial wind turbines erected around their homes. They worry about the impact this concentration of electricity-generating turbines will have on their health and the health of their children. In 2012, they took the developers to court, arguing the projects violated their Charter rights to security of the person. It was a novel argument, but it failed to persuade the appeal court.

Now the developers are seeking $340,000 in costs from the four families. Their lawyer, Julian Falconer, has described the wind companies “blood-sucking, intimidating bullies,” and their decision to pursue costs a “terror tactic.”

But the wind companies say the families knew the risks and the matter should never have been brought before the court. They say the families have the means to pay, and argue the case was contrary to the public interest because it delayed government-approved green energy projects.

What does it mean for the Prince Edward County Field Naturalists (PECFN) in their battle with an industrial wind company to preserve the Blanding’s turtle at Ostrander Point? Or other groups and individuals who have intervened in the protracted legal fight to prevent industrial wind turbines from being erected on Crown Land at Ostrander Point?

Not much, says legal counsel Eric Gillespie.

“Our office has been litigating these types of cases for many years,” says Gillespie. “We have never had a cost award against any of our clients of the size sought in the Drennan case. The most a court has awarded is a few thousand dollars per family.”

So why are the wind developers pursuing such a large amount, if the prospects are low?

Gillespie says the amount of costs the court awards is based on a variety of factors, including how the case is conducted.

“We can’t speak to those cases,” says Gillespie. “Only those we have been involved in. But we have never had anything similar to this with our clients. Our clients are apprised of the risks of costs related to their specific cases. We don’t believe any of the cases we have before the courts or anticipated to have before the courts, bear anything like the risk involved in the K2 project.”

He says the relative mismatch in resources between parties may also be factored into the court’s decision.

Many fear the wind companies’ aggressive pursuit of costs in the Drennan case will cause Ontario homeowners to back away from considering a legal challenge to the industrialization of their rural community.

Gillespie doubts it will have much impact on his clients. He has received only one call from a client about the story so far.

“Of the hundreds of clients we represent across Ontario, none have said they don’t want to proceed,” said Gillespie.