Ryanair cannot sue the Italian competition and antitrust authority in Ireland over a search of its Dublin headquarters last March, the High Court has ruled.
Mr Justice Max Barrett dismissed the airline's case against the Italian Autorità Garante Della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM) for want of jurisdiction by the Irish courts.
Ryanair DAC and Ryanair Holdings PLC brought proceedings against the Irish Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC) and the AGCM over the raid on the airline's offices near Dublin Airport on March 8th. Some 30 officers, including some from the AGCM, took part in the search.
The search came after a request to the CCPC by the AGCM, which began an investigation last September following complaints from two Italian travel agency associations and a consumer association.
Ryanair, it was alleged, through its online ticket sales system, precludes travel agencies from purchasing tickets via its website, where the lowest fares are available, and directs them instead to a global distribution system. This affects competition and amounts to an abuse of its dominant market position, it is claimed.
Ryanair denied the claims.
The airline then brought proceedings in Ireland claiming, among other things, that the search warrant obtained by the CCPC in the District Court was invalid.
It has asked the High Court to quash the warrant and also sought declarations that the material seized in the search is, either in whole or in part, tainted by illegality, inadmissible and should not have been removed from Ireland.
It says, among other things, that the District Court judge who issued the warrant should have been informed about two key Italian rulings that it says supports its position that it is not abusing its dominant market position.
Last month, Mr Justice Barrett was asked by AGCM to first determine whether Ireland is the proper jurisdiction against it for the Ryanair case.
In a judgment dismissing the case against the AGCM, Mr Justice Barrett found the Ryanair proceedings were covered by an EU regulation (Brussels Recast) governing jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters.
This regulation does not apply in civil and commercial matters whatever the nature of the court or tribunal.
The Ryanair case concerned revenue, customs or administrative matters or the liability of the State for acts and omissions in the exercise of State authority, he said.
He therefore acceded to the AGCM request to dismiss the proceedings against it for want of jurisdiction.
On Tuesday, the judge also put the case against the CCPC into later this month to deal with preliminary issues. He reserved a date in July for the hearing of the full case.
Martin Hayden SC, for Ryanair, said his client has also brought proceedings in Italy which have nothing to do with the search warrant.
