The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by Ryanair in its long-running defamation case against three pilots.
Ryanair had taken the case against former Ryanair pilot Captain John Goss, and two other pilots who had not worked for the airline, Captain Evert van Zwol and Captain Ted Murphy.
In 2013, the three were involved in an entity called the Ryanair Pilots Group, at a time when the airline still refused to recognise unions. All three were elected to the Interim Council of the RPG.
At the time, the council was receiving assistance from two executive members of the Irish Airline Pilots Association, Gerard Kelly and Martin Duffy, who were also described as "consultants".
The case centred on a "Pilot Update" prepared by them, certain drafts of which contained incorrect allegations that certain Ryanair executives may have disposed of shares during a period when such disposals would have been prohibited under stock exchange rules.
Ryanair commenced defamation proceedings, arguing that the Pilot Update of 12 September 2013 meant that Ryanair was guilty of market manipulation, had misled investors, had knowingly facilitated insider dealing by its managers, and had conspired with its managers to abuse the market(s) for its shares.
The defamation jury subsequently found that the pilot update of 12 September 2013 did mean that Ryanair was guilty of market manipulation, but did not mean that the airline had misled investors, knowingly facilitated insider dealings by its managers, or conspired with its managers to abuse the market(s) for its shares.
The jury also found no malice on the part of the three defendants, and the defamation action was dismissed.
Ryanair then appealed on seven grounds, including that the trial judge had erred in refusing to discharge the jury when an email chain between the parties to the preparation of the update only emerged belatedly during the evidence of Mr Duffy.
The airline argued the delayed disclosure had made a fair trial impossible, but the trial judge had allowed the case to continue.
It also claimed the trial judge had misdirected the jury in relation to the key email, and was wrong to find that qualified privilege applied.
Ryanair also contended that the jury's verdict was "perverse".
In today's Court of Appeal ruling, Mr Justice Seamus Noonan dismissed Ryanair's appeal on all grounds.
"I am satisfied that the trial judge correctly exercised his discretion in refusing to discharge the jury and that Ryanair failed to establish a real risk of an unfair trial," the judge stated.
Mr Justice Noonan also said that any ostensible prejudice to Ryanair was effectively eliminated by the trial judge allowing further cross-examination of all the relevant witnesses and giving appropriate directions to the jury.
He also upheld the High Court findings on discovery, that Mr Duffy was not an agent or servant of the respondents, and that Ryanair was not deprived of the opportunity to sue Mr Duffy or to plead at any relevant stage that the respondents were vicariously liable for his actions.
He found that the trial judge's ruling on the issue of qualified privilege was correct in law.
He noted that Ryanair could not raise matters on appeal which had not been complained of during the trial in the absence of Ryanair demonstrating that they had resulted in a manifest miscarriage of justice.
"It has not done so," the judge said.
The judge noted that while Ryanair had appealed on the ground that the jury verdict was perverse, "this ground of appeal was not pursued with great vigour by Ryanair as it was not referred to in either Ryanair's written or oral submissions".
The judge concluded: "Finally, it is to my mind clear that when all matters are taken into account and the trial viewed in the round, Ryanair has not established that the trial was unfair. I would accordingly dismiss this appeal."
Ms Justice Whelan and Mr Justice Haughton agreed with the ruling.
A comment has been sought from Ryanair.
