RYANAIR YESTERDAY formally asked a High Court judge, Mr Justice Peter Kelly, not to hear an action involving the airline arising from previous comments by the judge in another case that Ryanair and the truth are “uncomfortable bedfellows”.
Mr Justice Kelly yesterday reserved judgment on the application for him to discharge himself from hearing a case brought by Ryanair against a UK-based firm, Terravision London Finance Ltd, which provides bus services from certain airports out of which Ryanair operates.
Ryanair claims Terravision has breached a contract between the parties, but Terravision has denied that claim.
In its pre-trial application, Ryanair claimed it has a reasonable apprehension of bias against it due to the judge’s conduct of a separate case by the airline against the aviation regulator, in which the judge had described the truth and Ryanair as “uncomfortable bedfellows”.
In his judgment on that case last June, Mr Justice Kelly refused Ryanair permission to bring a judicial review challenge to a decision by the commission fixing maximum charges for Dublin airport over the years 2010-2014.
Having analysed evidence in that case, including evidence from Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary, the judge said, “having had to consider Ryanair’s untruths to the court, its untruths about the court and its untruths about the then minister [for transport Noel Dempsey], one has to conclude that the truth and Ryanair are uncomfortable bedfellows”.
He found that factual misstatements in affidavits put by Ryanair before the court in that case had “misled the court in a material way”.
Mr O’Leary, in a letter to Mr Dempsey in February 2010, had “seriously misrepresented” the position of the court and a later letter to Mr Dempsey from Ryanair’s head of legal affairs, Juliusz Komorek, was “to like effect”, the judge said.
Mr O’Leary had also made “a pathetic attempt” to try and justify the untruth contained in his letter.
Yesterday, Martin Hayden SC, for Ryanair, said its application was based on those comments. Mr O’Leary had apologised to the court in that case, it was also submitted.
In affidavits to the court, Mr O’Leary expressed his apprehension the judge had expressed a conclusion Ryanair does not tell the truth, counsel said.
Mr O’Leary also said the judge’s belief was not confined to particular persons within Ryanair or the particular issues that arose in the case involving the aviation authority.
Counsel said Ryanair’s chief operations officer, Michael Cawley, a witness in the action against Terravision, had stated in an affidavit that he has an apprehension any version of events advanced by him to the court would be influenced by Mr Justice Kelly’s conclusion that Ryanair and the truth are “uncomfortable bedfellows”.
In reply to the judge, Mr Hayden accepted untruths had been told “to the court, about the court and about the minister” in the case concerning the charges at Dublin airport.
The judge also asked counsel if the motion was based on counsel’s submissions only as Mr O’Leary “had gone behind his back” and written on more than one occasion to the president of the High Court.
Mr Hayden said that the case was based on the submissions only.
Rossa Fanning, for Terravision, said while the motion did not strictly involve his client, it was opposing the application.
Terravision could see no reason why the judge should not hear this action, he said.