Ryanair apologises to Cork man wrongly banned from flying with the airline
High Court reporters
Ryanair has "sincerely and unreservedly apologised" at the High Court to a Cork quantity surveyor who claimed he was wrongly banned from flying with the airline.
Eoin Michael Cahill sued the airline, claiming it defamed him after it wrongly accused him of engaging in alleged disruptive behaviour on a date earlier this year, on which he neither travelled on a Ryanair flight nor was he present at Dublin Airport.
He also claimed he had been defamed by Ryanair after it wrote to his employer informing it of the ban.
On Tuesday, Mr Justice Rory Mulcahy was informed that Ryanair wished to apologised to Mr Cahill and that the flight ban which was "incorrectly imposed" on him "has been withdrawn".
The airline said Mr Cahill had been "mistakenly identified" as a disruptive passenger alleged to have been involved in an altercation with the airline's staff. The incident on January 2nd required the assistance of airport police.
The airline, represented by Martin Hayden SC, said it accepts that Mr Cahill was not the passenger involved in the altercation, and has offered to make amends to Mr Cahill and correct the record with his employer.
It has offered to write a letter to his employer stating the message it sent regarding Mr Cahill was inaccurate and that all the allegations it made against him were "fully withdrawn".
It has also offered to pay Mr Cahill €10,000 in compensation, plus his legal costs as may be agreed.
'False and untenable allegation'
In his action, Mr Cahill said he is employed by the Jones Engineering Group, and is currently working on a project in Copenhagen, Denmark.
He claimed the flights he takes between Denmark and Ireland are purchased by his employer.
He told the court he was due to fly with Ryanair from Dublin to Copenhagen on January 2nd, but after extending his leave he did not travel on that date.
The following day, on January 3rd, Mr Cahill claims he was defamed in an email sent to his employer by Ryanair's customer services.
The email, he claimed, contained a false and untenable allegation that he was "disruptive" on his journey through Dublin Airport, and that he was prohibited from flying with Ryanair again.
He claimed what had happened to him would have disastrous implications on his professional reputation, especially as he has to travel to Denmark as part of his job.
Represented by Paul O'Higgins SC, instructed by solicitor CW Ashe and Company, Mr Cahill brought proceedings seeking an injunction requiring Ryanair to correct the record with his employer, and to lift the travel ban placed on him.
In his proceedings against both Ryanair DAC and Ryanair Holdings PLC, Mr Cahill, of Killarney Road, Macroom, Co Cork, also sought damages, including aggravated damages for the alleged defamation.
Investigation
In correspondence with Mr Cahill, the airline also said it had asked for time to complete an investigation into the allegations before seeking an injunction late last month against Ryanair.
Ryanair claimed Mr Cahill had not given the airline ample time to fully investigate the matter, and disputed his claims that the matter was urgent.
While it accepted Mr Cahill's annoyance and upset, the airline said it takes the issue of disruptive passengers very seriously given the impact such incidents have on passengers and staff.
Mr Cahill's lawyers rejected Ryanair's arguments and said the airline had ample time to address his complaints, but had failed to do so.
Ryanair had known about his complaints regarding the ban and the message to his employer since early January, and had not addressed his concerns, Mr Cahill's counsel submitted.
After hearing argument from both sides, Mr Justice Mulcahy agreed that the airline had known about Mr Cahill's complaint for some time before it completed its investigation, and said Mr Cahill was entitled to his legal costs for the injunction proceedings.
