The High Court dismissed appeals by Joan Dardis and Bernadette Curtis against Bus Éireann, rejecting their claims arising from a dispute at Busáras on 23 June 2013. Mr Justice Max Barrett found that the bus driver did not lose his temper or put the family party off the bus. The court will hear the parties separately on costs.
The sisters had travelled with eight family members intending to take a bus to Athlone and then continue to Knock. Curtis had a disability-related free travel pass. Dardis used a carer’s pass, but the person she cared for had died, and the court found she was not entitled to use that pass for free travel.
The dispute began after Dardis’s adult daughter, Jennifer, asked to settle her toddler before paying the fares due for her children. The driver agreed, then later went down the bus to collect payment. Curtis and Dardis said Jennifer’s nine-year-old son had offered the driver a €50 note, which he refused. The driver denied this, and the judge accepted his evidence. The court also found that Jennifer refused to pay for her children and that no payment was offered during the subsequent discussion.
The driver went to fetch an inspector. Gardaí were called, and the garda who attended asked the family party to leave the bus so the matter could be discussed discreetly. The court found they complied with that request; the bus left without them, and they later travelled to Knock by train.
The sisters’ claims had already failed in the Circuit Court and came before the High Court on appeal. They alleged, among other matters, defamation, negligence, breach of duty and contract, and misrepresentation. The judge found no basis in fact or law for the alleged wrongs. He concluded that neither sister had been the subject of a defamatory statement published to another person. He also found that Curtis could have continued the journey on her own pass, while Dardis had no entitlement to travel on the pass she was using.
The judgment considered whether the sisters’ past convictions meant they lacked a reputation capable of protection in a defamation action. The judge said convictions do not, by themselves, necessarily remove that possibility, though a criminal record may affect damages if a claim succeeds. He did not award damages because the claims were not established. The court has yet to determine costs.