The High Court adjourned Dublin Airport Authority’s application to dismiss ER Travel Limited’s claim after the company failed to pay €170,000 security for costs. Mr Justice Max Barrett directed the parties to return in mid-to-late July 2021, when the court would consider updated financial information and a plan from ER for raising the security.
The security was ordered in February 2020 in proceedings brought by ER against the DAA. The company’s claims concern its off-airport car-rental business and the DAA’s rules and actions at Dublin Airport. ER alleges, among other things, that the DAA acted unlawfully and restricted competition. Those underlying claims were not decided in this judgment.
The DAA applied to have the claim dismissed for want of prosecution because the security remained unpaid. It argued that the continuing proceedings exposed it to financial, operational and reputational risks. ER’s managing director said the company intended to provide the security but sought more time because the pandemic had effectively halted its trade. The DAA challenged the general nature of ER’s account and the absence of supporting exhibits.
Justice Barrett accepted that ER’s trade had essentially ceased and that its near-term prospects depended on travel restrictions, government decisions and support for the travel sector. He also accepted that the DAA faced prejudice if the proceedings remained on foot indefinitely. The court considered Irish decisions recognising a power to dismiss proceedings where security is not provided, but said that dismissal should be used sparingly and only in extreme cases. It distinguished the circumstances here, including the pandemic, from those earlier cases.
The court did not dismiss the claim or make an “unless” order. Instead, it adjourned both the DAA’s application and the proceedings to a date in mid-to-late July 2021 agreed by the parties. ER must provide the DAA, by 30 June 2021, with a comprehensive realistic programme for raising the security and its 2020 annual accounts. It must also provide 2021 management accounts, and half-year accounts if available by the hearing. June management accounts and any available half-year accounts are due as soon as they become available before the adjournment.
The judge said that if the proceedings were to continue, they should do so as soon as feasible in late 2021 or early 2022. Both parties have liberty to apply and may issue motions in advance of the adjourned hearing. No costs argument was made; the court suggested a brief further hearing within a fortnight to address costs and finalise the order.