Judge rules against DAA in car-hire case
The High Court has ruled that DAA, which operates Dublin Airport, acted in breach of competition legislation in its treatment of a car-hire company.
The case was taken by low-cost car-hire company ER Travel Limited, which operates exclusively online.
It has been operating in Dublin since 2015, using the airport to pick up and drop off its customers.
Bye-laws
The DAA refused permission to ER to operate at the airport in 2019.
It has also taken action aimed at enforcing airport bye-laws, arguing that these prohibit the use of the airport for any business purpose without the DAA’s permission.
The DAA had also argued that, to operate car-hire services at Dublin Airport, firms needed to participate and be successful in its regular tender processes to provide such services at the airport.
Ultra vires
Mr Justice Max Barrett, however, granted a declaration that DAA had acted contrary to sections 4 and 5 of the Competition Act 2002.
He also found that, in exercising powers under the State Airports Act 2004, as amended, the DAA had made bye-laws that were ultra vires and disproportionate.
“It is untenable to interpret the authority conferred by the Oireachtas as extending to the restriction or control of airport services in a manner that disregards established legal constraints,” Mr Justice Barrett stated.
“Such powers must, as a matter of constitutional and statutory construction, be interpreted in a manner that conforms with the requirements of competition law, the provisions of the [EU] treaties, and, more fundamentally, with the exercise of constitutionally protected rights – including the freedom to conduct a business,” he continued.
‘Concerted action’
The judge said that, in this instance, the bye-laws had been invoked against ER to preclude it from competing effectively with on-site operators.
He added that DAA’s use of the bye-laws “effectively to advance the interests of on-site operators” indicated “concerted action” between DAA and those operators, in contravention of article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
The judge, however, rejected ER’s claims of procedural unfairness by the DAA against it – including a claim of inconsistent enforcement action compared with Cork Airport, where ER also operates.