LAWYERS acting for a conservation charity have asked a Court of Session judge to stop a wind farm development at a beauty spot in the Highlands.
The John Muir Trust claim ministers should never have given the go ahead to the 67 turbine Stonelairg development near Fort Augustus, Inverness-shire.
On Wednesday, the trust's legal team told the court the June 2014 decision contravenes planning laws.
Advocate Sir Crispin Agnew QC told judge Lord Jones that if the scheme were to proceed, it would result in a piece of wild land being destroyed.
Sir Crispin added: "If consent was granted, this land would be cease to be called wild land."
He was speaking on the first day of a judicial review at the Edinburgh court. The trust wants the Court of Session to rule that the government's decision was illegal and for the proposed development to be stopped.
The proposed wind farm project would be located in the Monadhliath mountains and would cover an area equivalent in size to Inverness.
Opponents claim that people would be able to see the wind turbines from several miles away.
The proposal was approved by energy minister Fergus Ewing despite opposition from Scottish National Heritage and members of the public.
The proposal was also granted without a public local inquiry taking place.
At the time the decision was granted, the government said the project would generate power for 114,000 homes and bring £30 million of benefits to the area.
Mr Ewing said the wind farm would create work during its construction and operation.
He added: "Once it is up and running, the wind farm will save thousands of tonnes of carbon dioxide each year and will be able to produce enough electricity to power thousands of homes in the Highlands."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article