Ryanair DAC v SC VOLA.RO SRL & anor (Approved) [2020] IEHC 367 (24 July 2020)

Ryanair DAC v SC VOLA.RO SRL & anor (Approved) [2020] IEHC 367 (24 July 2020)

The plaintiff's application to strike out the first named defendant's counterclaim was refused as the high threshold for such relief was not met, but the counterclaim was found to be insufficiently pleaded and required further particulars. The court ordered a modular trial with the plaintiff's claim to be heard...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2020] IEHC 367
Parties
Plaintiff: Ryanair DAC; First Named Defendant: SC VOLA. RO SRL; Second Named Defendant: YPSILON. NET AG
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
24 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Civil / Post Interlocutory Applications, Pre Trial Directions
Outcome
Plaintiff's application to strike out counterclaim refused; modular trial ordered; costs apportioned; further particulars to be furnished by first named defendant.
Legal Topics
Striking Out Pleadings, Modular Trial, Costs, Case Management, Counterclaim Particulars
Civil Procedure Competition Law Striking Out Pleadings Modular Trial Costs Case Management Counterclaim Particulars

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ryanair DAC

Plaintiff

SC VOLA. RO SRL

First Named Defendant

YPSILON. NET AG

Second Named Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Post Interlocutory Applications, Pre Trial Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first named defendant's counterclaim should be struck out for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action or being frivolous/vexatious/abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether a stay should be granted on the prosecution of the counterclaim pending determination of the plaintiff's claim
  3. 3 Whether a modular trial should be ordered

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff's application to strike out the first named defendant's counterclaim was refused as the high threshold for such relief was not met, but the counterclaim was found to be insufficiently pleaded and required further particulars. The court ordered a modular trial with the plaintiff's claim to be heard first. Costs were apportioned based on the relative success of each party on the applications.

Court Disposition

Plaintiff's application to strike out counterclaim refused; modular trial ordered; costs apportioned; further particulars to be furnished by first named defendant.

Orders

  • Plaintiff's application to strike out first named defendant's claim dismissed.
  • First named defendant to furnish further particulars within six weeks regarding five matters identified in previous judgment.