Mr Justice Barry O'Donnell emphasized that if he did not pause the IAA's decision, the airlines would face "immediate serious consequences" that could severely impact their operations. He acknowledged the urgency of the airlines' application amid the slot allocation timetable, indicating that the severe harm claimed by the carriers warranted careful consideration.
Aer Lingus lawyers pointed out that the IAA’s use of the 2007 planning condition during its capacity assessment for the winter 2024/25 season was inappropriate, arguing that it was not a relevant factor this time. They claimed this represented a deviation from the norm, suggesting a broader issue regarding regulatory consistency and fairness in the environmental compliance measures being applied.
The IAA justified its decision by citing multiple constraints, including environmental and operational factors, alongside the prior planning conditions from An Bord Pleanála. These complexities illustrate the tension between growth in air traffic and regulatory limitations, which are necessary to ensure that expansion does not come at an unacceptable cost to local communities and the environment.
The airlines and DAA are equally involved in the legal challenges to the imposed seat caps, reflecting a divided stance in the industry. While Aer Lingus and Ryanair argue that the caps would harm their operations, DAA contends that the restrictions, especially the lower passenger ceiling, do not adequately address operational needs, revealing a lack of consensus on the optimal approach to airport capacity management.
Collection
[
|
...
]