The High Court has ordered Ticket Generator Limited to provide security for Ryanair Limited’s legal costs in their ongoing dispute over ticket sales at Dublin Airport. The court did not set the amount of security, leaving that issue for further submissions.
In a judgment delivered on 11 May 2012, Miss Justice Laffoy found that Ryanair had shown a prima facie defence to Ticket Generator’s pleaded claims. Ticket Generator’s counsel accepted that point at the hearing. The judge also found, on the evidence before her, that Ticket Generator would probably be unable to pay Ryanair’s costs if Ryanair succeeded in defending the case.
Ticket Generator, a company incorporated in the United Kingdom, alleges that Ryanair staff harassed and obstructed its staff and sought to divert passengers from its kiosk at Dublin Airport. It also alleges that Ryanair gave customers false or misleading information about Stansted Express rail tickets. Those are claims in the ongoing proceedings, not findings made in this judgment.
The security application was brought by Ryanair under Order 29 of the Rules of the Superior Courts. Ryanair relied on an estimate that defending the proceedings would cost between €125,000 and €150,000, excluding VAT. The judge considered evidence from an accountant who concluded that Ticket Generator lacked sufficient resources to meet costs of that scale. Ticket Generator produced evidence of a bank balance and a declaration of solvency, but the judge found that it had not contradicted the accountant’s conclusions.
Ticket Generator argued that two letters from Ryanair’s chief financial officer to Stansted Express showed conduct that should count as a special circumstance against ordering security. The letters complained about ticket sales at Dublin Airport and threatened possible steps including ending Ryanair’s onboard and online sales of the rail tickets. The judge held that the alleged interference with Ticket Generator’s contractual relationship with Stansted Express was not included in its pleaded claim. Ticket Generator might need to seek permission to amend its claim to add it. The judge also found no evidence that Ryanair had breached an undertaking given to the court in November 2011.
The court therefore ordered security under Order 29. It did not decide how much security Ticket Generator must provide, whether the costs estimate could be challenged, or whether the amount should be limited to one-third of estimated costs. The judge said she would hear further submissions on those questions. The underlying claims remain unresolved.