A jury at the Central Criminal Court has unanimously convicted five men of colluding a decade ago to drive tender prices higher in the provision of school bus services across the southwest of the country.
The panel of three women and seven men agreed with the prosecution case that the men had attempted to "load the dice" to distort competition in the market, affecting taxpayers.
Each of the defendants had operated buses or taxi services bringing children to and from school. The trial heard that all of the accused were involved in the process of bidding for tenders to provide school bus routes through Bus Éireann, which derived 54% of its turnover from school transport.
The jury heard that 10% of school routes were provided directly by Bus Éireann, with 90% serviced by contractors. The court heard that the Department of Education pays Bus Éireann to run the service, with €149m paid by the Department and €14m through fee collection from families, making a total budget of €163m in 2015.
114,000 school children are transported each day across 6,000 routes nationally.
In his opening speech, prosecution counsel Dominic McGinn SC had told the jury that the case is "not Hollywood" and there would never be a movie made out of it, but said that maintaining true competitiveness was an issue affecting everyone.
The five defendants, who are all from Tipperary, were 54-year-old Raymond Heney of Camas, Cashel; 62-year-old Andrew Walsh of Derrymore, Roscrea; 77-year-old Noel Browne of Bansha; 73-year-old Larry Hickey of Ardmayle, Cashel and 51-year-old Anthony Flynn of Golden Road, Cashel.
Mr Justice David Keane remanded all five on continuing bail ahead of a sentencing hearing on 23 March 2026.
The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC), along with the Director of Public Prosecutions, prosecuted the men. In a statement released today, the CCPC welcomed the verdicts, saying they follow a "thorough investigation" and represent a "significant milestone in the enforcement of competition law in Ireland".
The statement said: "Enforcing competition law benefits the Irish economy by ensuring open and dynamic markets for consumers. In Ireland, businesses or individuals that breach competition law may be subject to civil or criminal sanctions."
The jury heard that Heney would arrange to hold meetings in order to provide services and assistance in dealing with administrative processes in bidding for tenders. Mr Heney would invite other bus operators, and the prosecution alleged they would then discuss the allocation and pricing of the school bus routes.
It was the prosecution case that the people involved would only bid on tenders in a certain way, rather than doing so independently, with a "degree of coordination" between the parties.
The State argued that this concerted practice was not a formal agreement but collusion between the men that involved an exchange of information and a form of coordination that led to "the disappearance of competition".
Mr McGinn said that there was an alleged understanding that some people would not bid for a route which was to "be for somebody else".
Counsel said that people were alleged to have made bids for routes that they did not intend to get, but gave the impression of a genuine bid, which would result in the lower price submission being elevated.
Counsel for Heney, Dermot B Cahill SC, said that of the total budget of €163m for school bus transport, €116m - 71% - was paid to contractors in 2015.
Ceara McBride, Procurement and Materials Manager with Bus Éireann, agreed with Mr Cahill that as contractors were providing 90% of the services but costing 71% of the budget, this represented "great value for money".
Mr Cahill told the jury in his closing speech that his client was "supporting his fellow bus men" in the tendering process.
"If this were a film, he would be the star," said Mr Cahill, going on to describe Heney's co-accused as "co-stars" or "extras".
"The one man that kept drivers in the market by ensuring they put their tenders in was Ray Heney," he said, adding that his client "kept a pool of drivers available" for the school bus routes.
Mr Cahill said that the documents the operators had to fill in as part of the tender process were quite substantial and some of the bus drivers needed assistance. He said that Heney convened two meetings and was acting as a consultant to other bus operators, something that Bus Éireann was aware of.
Counsel referenced a slide presentation Heney made to his fellow bus operators, in which the defendant highlighted the point that they were all working to make a profit.
Mr Cahill said this was not an attempt to create "price fixing" but merely Heney’s message to remind his fellow operators of why they did the work they do.
However, Mr McGinn told the jury it was the prosecution's position that: "You cannot go into a tender process and discuss who was bidding for what and how much they were bidding."
Tim O’Leary SC, acting for Andrew Walsh, told the jury that the CCPC was a bureaucracy that had to "justify itself" by carrying out the investigation.
He said it was "blindingly obvious" that his client was innocent and that there was no agreement between him and other operators.
Desmond Dockery SC, for Anthony Flynn, said that his client was "unsuited to the task" of filling out the paperwork required. He said that he relied on Raymond Heney to advise him.
He asked the jury not to mistake what he said was normal engagement with Raymond Heney as a concerted practice, where Flynn was knowingly involved in any wrongdoing.
Outlining a summary of the evidence of the case, Mr Justice Keane said that the prosecution alleged there was a concerted practice involving all accused men, coordinated by Heney.
He reminded the jury that Mr McGinn had argued the prosecution only needed to prove that the defendants had the object to prevent, restrict or distort competition and didn’t need to prove that the men had succeeded.
Mr Justice Keane said it was the defence’s argument separately for each man that the prosecution had failed to discharge the burden of proof and that there were "too many gaps" and "too many unanswered questions".
He said that defence counsel on behalf of Heney argued that he operated as a consultant to assist in filling out forms, while Bus Éireann were aware that he was doing so.
He said it was their case that this was not unlawful collusion and that there was no evidence of any anti-competition practices. He said the defence highlighted that the meetings held were in public and were openly advertised.
In his closing speech for the prosecution, Mr McGinn said: "When you look at the evidence as a whole, no other reasonable conclusion is available but that these men were involved in a concerted practice with the object to prevent, restrict or distort the competition."
The single charge against each accused alleged that between 1 November 2014 and 31 December 2016, they engaged in a concerted practice which had as its object or effect the prevention, restriction or distortion of competition in trade in the provision of school transport services.
They each pleaded not guilty.
