Ryanair DAC v An Taoiseach & ors (Approved) [2020] IEHC 461 (02 October 2020)

Ryanair DAC v An Taoiseach & ors (Approved) [2020] IEHC 461 (02 October 2020)

The Government's travel advice, as of August/September 2020, was advisory in nature and did not purport to impose legally binding restrictions. There was no unequivocal representation that compliance was legally required or subject to sanction. The executive did not exceed its powers by issuing such advice, and there was no breach of constitutional or EU law. The threshold for judicial intervention was not met.

Citation
[2020] IEHC 461
Parties
Applicant: Ryanair DAC; Respondents: An Taoiseach, Ireland and the Attorney General; Notice Party: Aer Lingus Ltd
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
02 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Substantive Hearing on Leave and Merits (rolled Up Hearing)
Outcome
Application refused; leave for judicial review not granted.
Legal Topics
Separation of Powers, Executive Power, Judicial Review, Public Health Advice, COVID 19 Regulations, Standing (locus Standi), EU Free Movement
Constitutional Law Administrative Law European Union Law Public Health Law Separation of Powers Executive Power Judicial Review Public Health Advice +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryanair DAC

Applicant

An Taoiseach, Ireland and the Attorney General

Respondents

Aer Lingus Ltd

Notice Party

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Substantive Hearing on Leave and Merits (rolled Up Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Government's COVID-19 travel advice constituted a legally enforceable restriction or mere advice
  2. 2 Whether the executive could issue public health advice absent statutory authority
  3. 3 Whether the travel advice breached EU law rights (free movement, establishment, services)

Ratio Decidendi

The Government's travel advice, as of August/September 2020, was advisory in nature and did not purport to impose legally binding restrictions. There was no unequivocal representation that compliance was legally required or subject to sanction. The executive did not exceed its powers by issuing such advice, and there was no breach of constitutional or EU law. The threshold for judicial intervention was not met.

Court Disposition

Application refused; leave for judicial review not granted.

Orders

  • Refusal of leave to apply for judicial review
  • No order setting aside the Government's travel advice