John McKenzie, founder of GlenWyvis distillery, has hit out at the distillery’s current ownership following a long and on going dispute. He claims that the project has been “hijacked” and is moving away from its “original ethos”.
McKenzie first dreamt of building a new distillery in Dingwall back in 2013. Built on his farm near Ben Wyvis, the distillery would be the first in the area in over 90 years. Both community and sustainability were to be at the heart of GlenWyvis; the early vision for the company saw a 100% community owned distillery with legitimate environmental credentials.
After funding much of the early parts of the process himself (including the registering the name, and paying for staff, equipment deposits and planning permission), McKenzie launched a successful crowdfunding campaign in 2016. This brought £2.4 million in investment for the project. Impressively, 60% of new shareholders were local and registered in the IV postal area.
In November 2017, production started at GlenWyvis and their first release followed in 2021. A number of well-received small batch releases have followed, as well as cask aged gin produced at the distillery.
McKenzie’s greatest personal investment came in the form of land. He granted a 175 year lease for the distillery in return for £1 rent annually - a move McKenzie now calls “the biggest mistake of my life”.
In addition to the land, McKenzie is also responsible for maintaining the renewable energy systems that help power the distillery. This includes a 12kW hydroelectric turbine, a 30kW solar farm, an 11kW wind turbine, and a 3kW solar thermal.
This does not fully power the distillery (despite Scotland’s reputation for poor weather, it doesn’t always rain and the wind doesn’t always blow. Less surprising is the sun not always shining) and as such GlenWyvis also sources energy from the grid. It’s at this point the latest chapter in this conflict begins.
McKenzie claims the distillery has stopped paying for the electricity used at the site, leaving him with an energy bill of £19,953. He faced having the energy to both his farm and the distillery cut off, though this has been held off pending an upcoming court hearing.
GlenWyvis dispute these claims. They responded to the allegations by saying that, as per a previous arrangement, the distillery made regular, fixed payments to Mr McKenzie to cover energy costs.
This agreement was revised in 2022 in light of rising energy costs, however the distillery insist that McKenzie did not provide them with the necessary information and were unable to determine the appropriate proportion of any energy bills to be paid for by the distillery. Therefore, they continued to pay McKenzie at the rate previously agreed upon.
The distillery were only made aware of the outstanding bill and the fact that they could be cut off in March 2024. In a final twist, GlenWyvis claim that after talking to the energy supplier directly, they discovered that the threat of disconnection actually came at McKenzie’s request.
While this issue is ongoing at the time of writing, it isn’t the first point of contention between the two parties.
McKenzie resigned from GlenWyvis in 2019 after discovering other members of the management committee had set up a business together that had not been disclosed. This was a particularly turbulent time for the distillery, as seven of the twelve committee members stepped down over a 12 month period.
The issue of the land remains problematic as well. McKenzie has expressed his desire to sell his farm and the land that is leased to the distillery. While GlenWyvis had earlier ambitions to purchase the land, a recent statement declared that “the acquisition of the landlord’s farm would not be an effective use of the Society’s resources”. Additionally, GlenWyvis had previously said that they would consider the distillery being included in any sale but refused to commit.
McKenzie had previously refused the distillery planning permission to build a visitor centre on the land and he believes that the current impasse stems from this disagreement.
Complicating matters further is a series of interdicts issued against Mr McKenzie. These prevent him from impeding the access rights granted in the lease, while another prevents him from accessing the distillery. A third order warns against taking "any action which has the effect of harassing or causing alarm or distress to visitors or staff”.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, McKenzie also suspects that this legal action is related to his initial refusal to sell to the distillery. And he has good reason to suspect as much.
In 2020 McKenzie received a letter from American investment expert David Norcom - one of GlenWyvis’ current board members - describing McKenzie as one of the hardest people he’s had to work with. The same letter warned that McKenzie was in for “the fight of [his] life” before promising to take their issues to court.
Yet another facet of this drama is that McKenzie also believes that the businessmen behind GlenWyvis are moving the distillery away from it’s “original ethos”. This is refuted by the distillery, who cite the fact that they have granted £50,000 to small businesses in the area and continue to work with local community groups as evidence against this.
Describing all of this as a messy situation would be an understatement. As is often the case, there’s an element of schoolyard ‘he said she said’ about some of the claims being made. It will ultimately be up to the courts to decide who’s right.
It’s interesting that GlenWyvis recently launched their third crowdfunding campaign. They hope to raise £2 million help increase production, expand their bonded warehouse and build an onsite bottling facility. They also hope to build their long desired visitor centre, though this will be based in Dingwall itself rather than at their distillery. Some of the funds will also go towards the distillery’s community efforts.
Chairman David McIntyre has said that GlenWyvis “are passionate about supporting our local community and in line with this commitment, we are proud to have allocated grants to educational and cultural initiatives, as well as to local entrepreneurs to help their businesses grow” - this statement no doubt another counter to McKenzie’s “hijacked from the original ethos” claim.
It’s unfair to speculate, but one wonders if that’s all the money will be used for. Having already spent over £100,000 on legal fees since 2022, it wouldn’t be surprising if some of that money gets used to fill their war chest for future courtroom battles against their original founder.
It’s a shame to see a distillery established with such noble ambitions have its name associated with these unfortunate and complicated legal issues. Hopefully, once the dust of litigation as settled, GlenWyvis can get back to the business of making whisky “in the spirit of goodwill in which it was founded” as they have said they want to do.
