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.
‘You’re a disgrace’: Dáil air turns blue after Danny Healy-Rae gets personal with Paul Murphy
John McManus: Was Derek Quinlan punished for having an astute businesswoman for a wife? Looks like it
Edward Luce: Donald Trump has a mandate to overhaul the US in unimaginably disruptive ways
Gordon D’Arcy: The haka needs to be answered or else it becomes one-sided pageantry
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.