The EU Court of Justice has ruled the passenger cap at Dublin Airport may be taken into account when allocating airline slots and could result in an airline losing an allocation it has previously used.
Colman O’Sullivan runs through the ramifications of this ruling.
What does the EU Court of Justice’s decision mean?
It means that as things stand the Irish Aviation Authority can limit the number of take-off and landing slots they allocate to airlines for flights to and from Dublin Airport.
Those limits would reflect the 32 million annual passenger cap.
Ryanair and the US lobby group, Airlines for America, had challenged that in a case that reached the EU Court of Justice.
Those who oppose the passenger cap argue that it is an artificial limit as Dublin Airport has the physical capacity to accommodate many more passengers.
But today, the court ruled that legal limits set down in a development consent can be included as part of the basis for an objective analysis of the airport’s capacity.
It ruled that it is immaterial whether the rule is longstanding or whether the policy underlying it has evolved.
It could even mean airlines losing a slot or part of a slot.
The ruling also states that slots cannot be considered as property of the airline as they are allocated on a time limited or temporary basis.
Could the number of flights at Dublin Airport be cut because of this ruling?
It seems unlikely.
The Oireachtas passed a law this summer giving Minister for Transport Darragh O’Brien the power to lift the passenger cap, which he said he intends to do as soon as he can.
However, a process, which may include an environmental assessment, will proceed before Minister O’Brien makes his decision.
Any lifting of the passenger cap could also face further delays due to potential legal challenges.
The Irish Aviation Authority is not expected to allocate its Dublin airport Winter 2027 slots until May next year.
If the passenger cap at Dublin Airport is abolished, amended or replaced before then, the court ruling could be moot.
Reaction to the ruling
Ryanair and Aer Lingus have both said this ruling shows the need to lift the passenger cap.
In a statement Aer Lingus said: “The priority now is for the remaining statutory process to be completed as quickly as possible so that the passenger cap can be amended, providing the long-term certainty needed by airlines, passengers and the wider Irish economy.”
Ryanair described the ruling as “absurd in the case of Dublin Airport, which has recently opened a 2nd runway (paid for by its airlines and passengers), which takes capacity as Dublin Airport to 60m passengers per annum, yet Dublin operates under a 2007 artificial planning restriction of 32m passengers per annum”.
“In 2026, Dublin Airport actual traffic will exceed 36m so this outdated 32m cap is absurd.
“Dublin Airport’s traffic cap of 32m must now be abolished.”
Environmental groups say the Government can and should limit flights.
Friends of the Irish Environment said: “The Government should now take action to manage passenger and flight numbers with two vital goals in mind – firstly to control climate impacts consistent with the National Climate Objective and secondly to protect the health of local residents from aircraft noise and sleep disruption.”
Sorcha Tunney, Senior Manager at Opportunity Green, an environmental NGO said that “courts are increasingly recognising the responsibility of governments to address the harms from inadequate climate action to human rights and public health”.
“Removing the cap without adequately addressing the resulting emissions could increase Ireland’s exposure to legal challenge under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects citizens’ fundamental rights,” she added.
A statement from the Department of Transport said: “The minister notes the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
“As this matter is the subject of ongoing proceedings in the Irish High Court, the Minister will make no further comment on the matter.”
The Irish Aviation Authority said it also notes the ruling and issued a statement saying: “The IAA will now consider the potential implications of the judgment on the domestic proceedings, and for future slot capacity decisions.”
