Controversial wind farm with eight 150-metre turbines rejected by court after ministerial approval

The project was first given the green light in January 2025 by a Scottish Government reporter, but following an appeal lodged by a company that owns the nearby Raeburn Farm, Court of Session appeal judges have now upheld the arguments made by the farm’s lawyers.

Lawyers instructed by Raeburn Farm argued the reporter did not follow correct legal proceedings when arriving at their decision.

The submitted proposal included plans for the construction of eight turbines and other infrastructure, but did not provide sufficient details of the off-site grid connection required for sending generated power to the electrical grid.

As a result, Raeburn’s lawyers argued the approval process could not have considered the environmental impact and was therefore unlawful.

On behalf of the judges - Lady Wise, Lord Pentland and Lord Ericht - Lady Wise ruled there were oversights in the reporter’s approval process and “failing to conduct the necessary fact specific evaluation of the proposal”.

She wrote, “It was incumbent upon him to do so before reaching a conclusion on whether the wind farm and grid connection constituted a single project for which an EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) report that analysed the potentially significant cumulative effects of both aspects was required.

“We reject the submission made at the hearing before us by Senior Counsel for the respondents that any error by the reporter on this point was not a material one,” she said, reaffirming, “this was a material error”.

The trio of judges reversed the decision made in January 2025 and instructed it be reevaluated by “a different reporter for a fresh decision”.

The Scottish Borders Council first denied the application in 2020 due to the "unacceptable significant adverse impacts on the landscape”.

The developer revised their project plans to relocate the turbines and increase the original 130m height to 150m, resubmitting the proposal in 2024.

Council planning officers initially approved the revision, but later reversed their position following significant public outcry, rejecting the plans for a second time and reiterated “significant landscape and visual impacts”.

The second Council denial prompted Energiekontor UK to successfully appeal the decision to the Scottish Government.

In his report, the government reporter at the centre of Raeburn Farm’s appeal noted the development would be responsible for “significant adverse landscape and visual effects”, but accepted “"this is to be expected for a proposal of this kind".

Though relief at the court’s denial of Energiekontor’s application may be short-lived, community action groups are now looking upon the Wull Muir decision as a case study for other ongoing disputes.

Lyndsey Ward, an admin of the Communities B4 Power Companies Facebook Group, has been pushing back on wind farm developers for 15 years.

Following Lady Wise’s judgement, she wrote, “It makes my heart sing to see Energiekontor going through the wringer.

“What an appalling company they are: cocky, dismissive and smug are the words that come to mind after attending their 'consultations' in my community.”

Ms Ward welcomed the “court slap for Wull Muir wind abomination” for not considering the grid connection.

Referencing other Energiekontor development proposals, she said: “they have already had a push back in Sutherland for their unbelievable Strath Oykel development that the witless Scottish government passed despite reporters saying no.”

She says she is "aiming for the hat-trick here in Kilmorack".

Six years after Scottish Borders Council first denied Energiekontor’s applications, the options laid out in Lady Wise’s judgement means that if the developer plans to proceed with the Wull Muir project, it will be required to conduct a thorough environmental impact assessment - including the infrastructure required in exporting electricity to the grid - to be reconsidered for approval.