Common sense would appear to have prevailed – for the moment – in the argument over whether passenger numbers at Dublin Airport should be capped at 25.5 million next summer.
The High Court halted the implementation of a cap on Monday after hearing claims from airlines using the airport that it will cause them serious economic harm and also have a negative impact on the public and the wider economy.
Faced with such serious claims from credible parties, the court had little choice but to press the pause button just days before the process of allocating takeoff and landing slots at the airport under the cap for next summer was due to begin.
The issue of the appropriate size of the cap now has to be thrashed out and that will happen as part of a wider challenge taken against the Irish Aviation Authority – which sets the cap – by the airlines. The pause will hold until that case is resolved.
Why are we getting condensation on our new triple-glazed windows?
The Waterford beekeeper: ‘I got four or five stings on my face today, but you wouldn’t know it’
Fern fever: home with award-winning Morocco-inspired garden in Glasnevin for €895,000
The 12 savings of Christmas: When to shop (November), what to drink (not Champagne) and more
The IAA argues that its hands are tied by a passenger limit set out in the planning permission granted for the airport’s expansion in 2007 by An Bord Pleanála. The Dublin Airport Authority, which operates the airport, is currently seeking to have the passenger limit increased to 40 million a year.
This week’s ruling means that the existing passenger limit is now at risk of being breached next year, which will expose the DAA to enforcement action and potential criminal sanctions.
In the view of the court this was not sufficient reason to let the slot allocation process proceed and the balance of justice overwhelming supported pausing the cap.
The court seems to have found persuasive the argument put forward by the airlines that if they lose slots in Dublin they also risk losing the corresponding slots at reciprocating airports under a “use them or lose them” arrangement.
The court will consider these issues at the full hearing. It remains to be seen whether they will take the view that the commercial interest of the airlines trumps the obligation of state bodies to comply with the planning law.