Dianne delivered a presentation to the American Bar Association on July 22, providing a comprehensive overview of wind litigation in Ontario since the Green Energy Act came into effect.
She traced a number of trends in the types of wind cases that are being brought before the Environmental Review Tribunal (including the persistent failure of challenges to wind approvals, especially those based on human health concerns, and the wave of constitutional challenges that followed initial failed challenges based on purely statutory grounds and which may now be petering out). She also discussed several of the more interesting and unusual cases, most of which we have written about before, including Cham Shan Temple v Director (whether turbines violated the Charter rights of pilgrims who might be distracted when potentially passing them by en route to a temple), Dixon v Director (whether the statutory test opponents are required to pass violates their section 7 Charter rights), Fata v Director (whether potential interference with weather forecasting equipment would cause "serious harm" to human health), and the Ostrander Point proceedings (the drawn-out saga involving Blandings turtles, roads, and a bird sanctuary, among characters). She also highlighted some recent and unfolding developments, such as the fact that wind appeals are beginning to settle, the nocebo effect, and recent findings from Health Canada about the effects of wind turbines on human health.
You can find a copy of her presentation here: Dianne Saxe_Ontario Wind Farm Litigation
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
