The Court of Appeal reduced an award to commercial airline pilot Padraig Higgins in his defamation action against the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA), replacing the jury’s net award of €387,000 with €76,500.
The appeal concerned damages after the IAA made an offer of amends under the Defamation Act 2009, which Higgins accepted. The parties did not agree compensation, so a jury assessed it at €300,000 in general damages and €130,000 in aggravated damages. It applied a 10% discount for the offer of amends. The IAA appealed the amounts and the discount. Higgins asked the court to uphold the jury’s award.
The case arose from three emails sent by IAA staff member John Steel to IAA and UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) personnel in June and July 2013. The emails raised possible licensing and flight-clearance issues concerning Higgins’s microlight flights and said he and another pilot would not get away “scot free”. In its accepted offer of amends, the IAA admitted the meanings Higgins pleaded, including that the emails suggested he had flown without required permissions and endangered a passenger. The UK CAA had closed its investigation in July 2013, saying it had found no evidence of an offence and would take no further action.
The Court of Appeal held that the jury’s damages were so disproportionate to the injury that no reasonable jury would have awarded them. It considered the allegations exceptionally serious for a commercial pilot and noted that the emails went to aviation regulators. But publication was limited, and the emails had no practical effect on Higgins’s employment or personal life. The court said he experienced worry and distress, but had not faced regulatory sanctions or adverse employment consequences.
The court substituted its own assessment rather than ordering a new jury trial, citing the need to bring the long-running case to a fair conclusion and avoid further costs. It set general damages at €70,000 and aggravated damages at €15,000. The latter reflected the IAA’s conduct before its offer of amends, particularly a 2014 letter indicating it would vigorously defend the case while standing over the emails and relying on qualified privilege.
The court left the jury’s 10% discount unchanged, citing the IAA’s nearly two-year delay in making the offer and its refusal to meet to discuss compensation after its proposal was rejected. The resulting award was €76,500. The court invited written submissions on appeal costs and had not yet ruled on them.