The High Court has prevented Ryanair from bringing a further legal challenge to the granting of planning permission for a second terminal at Dublin airport.
Mr Justice Frank Clarke ruled yesterday that the terms of settlement of a previous court action precluded Ryanair from bringing a fresh challenge to the permission for the T2 terminal.
He was referring to a settlement between Ryanair and the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) in 2006 of a challenge by the airline to the second terminal. An Bord Pleanála granted planning permission for T2 last August.
Ryanair launched a High Court challenge to the validity of that decision in September.
Last month, the DAA applied to the High Court to have that challenge dismissed. Mr Justice Clarke granted that application yesterday.
Ryanair had launched the first legal challenge shortly after the Government decided in May 2005 to grant permission for the second terminal. That action was settled almost a year later following correspondence between Ryanair chief executive Michael O'Leary and DAA chief executive Declan Collier.
The Government decision was based on passenger projections of 30 million by 2020 and it was envisaged that the second terminal should be built by 2009.
In its first challenge, Ryanair claimed the decision to allow the DAA to build T2 was an abuse of its dominant position and it breached EU treaties and competition law. Ryanair also argued it was done in order to allow "inefficient" trade union-controlled work practices to continue at the new terminal. The case was settled in March 2006 and struck out by the court on agreed terms.
Yesterday, the judge said the agreement arose after it appeared "peace had broken out" between Ryanair and the DAA following a long history of disputes between the two parties.
Dismissing Ryanair's proceedings, Mr Justice Clarke found that the recently approved planning permission was in keeping with a report commissioned by the DAA in September 2005 and upon which the agreement which led to the legal settlement was based.
On the basis of the agreement reached between Ryanair and the DAA in March 2006, the airline was precluded from taking any further legal action, he ruled.
The Irish Times
www.buckplanning.ie
Showing posts with label ryanair. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ryanair. Show all posts
Saturday, 12 January 2008
Friday, 22 June 2007
Ryanair calls for block to terminal plans
Ryanair has called on the Commission for Aviation Regulation (CAR) to either block the Dublin Airport Authority’s (DAA) plans for its €850 million second terminal at Dublin Airport — saying that it’s “the wrong size, wrong cost and in the wrong location” — or force Aer Lingus, who will occupy the facility, to pay for it.
“The CAR’s draft decision has now confirmed what Ryanair has been saying all along — DAA’s T2 is excessively large and grossly expensive. Despite this, the CAR is allowing DAA to proceed with this development and the regulator expects Ryanair’s passengers to subsidise this white elephant, which will never be fully utilised because of Fingal County Council planning restrictions,” said Ryanair’s head of regulatory affairs, Jim Callaghan.
Irish Examiner
“The CAR’s draft decision has now confirmed what Ryanair has been saying all along — DAA’s T2 is excessively large and grossly expensive. Despite this, the CAR is allowing DAA to proceed with this development and the regulator expects Ryanair’s passengers to subsidise this white elephant, which will never be fully utilised because of Fingal County Council planning restrictions,” said Ryanair’s head of regulatory affairs, Jim Callaghan.
Irish Examiner
Tuesday, 5 June 2007
Ryanair criticised for plan to take on Eurostar with Brussels flights
Ryanair came in for renewed criticism from environmental campaigners yesterday after it launched a route in direct competition with Eurostar. Europe's largest low-cost carrier reopened its Stansted to Brussels service yesterday, taking on the cross-channel train operator, whose passengers generate a tenth as much carbon dioxide per journey as plane travellers.
Greenpeace accused the airline of encouraging "binge flying" by targeting a route where trains have captured two-thirds of the market. "If we don't look at alternative forms of transport, then we will need new runways at Heathrow and Stansted because the capacity is being taken up by these unnecessary flights," said John Sauven, a Greenpeace director.
The move came in the week that green groups lobbied a public inquiry into expanding Stansted and warned that relaxing flight restrictions at Britain's third largest airport would contravene government climate change policy.
Ryanair said it had relaunched the service, which flies to Charleroi, an hour's drive from Brussels, because Eurostar and rival airline fares had become too high. Ryanair is offering return flights to Brussels next weekend at £41, against £99 on Eurostar.
Ryanair admitted this week it was concerned about the impact of the green lobby on the airline market. Howard Millar, its deputy chief executive, said: "I am concerned that there is a continuing media campaign, and the concern is that people might say, 'Maybe I will not fly on holiday, and maybe I will make a different choice'."
BAA, the owner of Stansted, said the Ryanair move did not undermine its case at the inquiry. The airport group is seeking permission to increase the maximum number of passengers flying in and out from 25 million to 35 million a year.
"It shows there is an appetite for flights and therefore a need to expand our airports. If airlines open new routes it's because the demand is there," said a BAA spokesman.
Ryanair and other Stansted airlines have formed an unusual alliance with green campaigners in opposing BAA's expansion plans. The airlines argue that the proposal is too expensive, with higher airport fees translating into rising ticket prices. The Stansted inquiry verdict comes next year and a consultation on a third runway at BAA's prize asset, Heathrow, starts in the autumn.
© The Guardian
Greenpeace accused the airline of encouraging "binge flying" by targeting a route where trains have captured two-thirds of the market. "If we don't look at alternative forms of transport, then we will need new runways at Heathrow and Stansted because the capacity is being taken up by these unnecessary flights," said John Sauven, a Greenpeace director.
The move came in the week that green groups lobbied a public inquiry into expanding Stansted and warned that relaxing flight restrictions at Britain's third largest airport would contravene government climate change policy.
Ryanair said it had relaunched the service, which flies to Charleroi, an hour's drive from Brussels, because Eurostar and rival airline fares had become too high. Ryanair is offering return flights to Brussels next weekend at £41, against £99 on Eurostar.
Ryanair admitted this week it was concerned about the impact of the green lobby on the airline market. Howard Millar, its deputy chief executive, said: "I am concerned that there is a continuing media campaign, and the concern is that people might say, 'Maybe I will not fly on holiday, and maybe I will make a different choice'."
BAA, the owner of Stansted, said the Ryanair move did not undermine its case at the inquiry. The airport group is seeking permission to increase the maximum number of passengers flying in and out from 25 million to 35 million a year.
"It shows there is an appetite for flights and therefore a need to expand our airports. If airlines open new routes it's because the demand is there," said a BAA spokesman.
Ryanair and other Stansted airlines have formed an unusual alliance with green campaigners in opposing BAA's expansion plans. The airlines argue that the proposal is too expensive, with higher airport fees translating into rising ticket prices. The Stansted inquiry verdict comes next year and a consultation on a third runway at BAA's prize asset, Heathrow, starts in the autumn.
© The Guardian
Monday, 23 April 2007
O'Leary and DAA in war of words over new terminal
RYANAIR chief executive Michael O'Leary has claimed that the Dublin Airport Authority (DAA) effectively tried to "buy our silence" during the planning process for Dublin Airport's proposed second terminal by offering talks on building a third one for the airline.
The DAA has confirmed that high-level meetings regarding a third terminal took place between it and Ryanair last August.
However, it said that it strongly refuted O'Leary's allegation.
O'Leary claimed to the Sunday Tribune that, during these meetings, the DAA proposed to set up a working group examining the possibility of building a third terminal on the condition that Ryanair didn't lodge a planning objection against its Terminal 2 plans.
He said that the airline immediately rejected the proposal.
"It is a bit like getting involved in a hospital study group. You'd be sitting there studying it for the next 25 years with the DAA while they build a second terminal that costs four times what it should and doubles passenger charges."
The airline subsequently lodged an objection with Fingal County Council, which granted permission for the new terminal last October. Ryanair, An Taisce and local residents later appealed that decision to An Bord Pleanala. An oral hearing into the terminal is currently ongoing.
The airline has argued that the terminal is too expensive, is the wrong design and is in the wrong place. Last week, it threatened to freeze its expansion at the airport if it is approved.
A spokesman for the DAA claimed, however, that Ryanair raised the issue of a third terminal during the talks. He said that it was one of the preconditions that the airline had placed on its support for Terminal 2.
"The DAA agreed to support Ryanair on these issues but stressed that there were many planning and logistical barriers to the construction of a third terminal on the existing airport campus that would, at a minimum, delay its delivery until after 2011, " the spokesman claimed.
He also claimed that the DAA's discussions with the airline were part of an extensive consultation process which it carried out prior to lodging its planning application for Terminal 2.
He claimed that its talks with Ryanair came to an end when the airline "unilaterally terminated these discussions soon after the submission by the DAA of its planning application last August".
Sunday Tribune
The DAA has confirmed that high-level meetings regarding a third terminal took place between it and Ryanair last August.
However, it said that it strongly refuted O'Leary's allegation.
O'Leary claimed to the Sunday Tribune that, during these meetings, the DAA proposed to set up a working group examining the possibility of building a third terminal on the condition that Ryanair didn't lodge a planning objection against its Terminal 2 plans.
He said that the airline immediately rejected the proposal.
"It is a bit like getting involved in a hospital study group. You'd be sitting there studying it for the next 25 years with the DAA while they build a second terminal that costs four times what it should and doubles passenger charges."
The airline subsequently lodged an objection with Fingal County Council, which granted permission for the new terminal last October. Ryanair, An Taisce and local residents later appealed that decision to An Bord Pleanala. An oral hearing into the terminal is currently ongoing.
The airline has argued that the terminal is too expensive, is the wrong design and is in the wrong place. Last week, it threatened to freeze its expansion at the airport if it is approved.
A spokesman for the DAA claimed, however, that Ryanair raised the issue of a third terminal during the talks. He said that it was one of the preconditions that the airline had placed on its support for Terminal 2.
"The DAA agreed to support Ryanair on these issues but stressed that there were many planning and logistical barriers to the construction of a third terminal on the existing airport campus that would, at a minimum, delay its delivery until after 2011, " the spokesman claimed.
He also claimed that the DAA's discussions with the airline were part of an extensive consultation process which it carried out prior to lodging its planning application for Terminal 2.
He claimed that its talks with Ryanair came to an end when the airline "unilaterally terminated these discussions soon after the submission by the DAA of its planning application last August".
Sunday Tribune
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)