I'm taking Ryanair through the small claims court

Markh5096

fatboy12 said:

I also lost my case against Ryanair because of flights I was unable to take in 2020 because of lockdown legislation. I booked flights in January 2020 to fly in September 2020. The  Welsh Government imposed lockdown legislation in September 2020 making it illegal for us to catch the flights. Ryanair refused a refund or a credit note because the flight had not been cancelled. After reading an article published on the MSE  website regarding a Mr. Blades winning his  case against Ryanair I decided to take Ryanair to the small claims court. Mr Blades was following government advice against non essential travel and decided not to fly, but Ryanair refused to refund him his ticket money. The judge found in favour of Mr. Blades. I produced the adjudication as evidence in my case but the judge found in favour of Ryanair. It a mystery to me how two small claim court judges can differ in their adjudication when provided with the same evidence . I understand  the decision in the Blades v Ryanair action is not case law but I am at a loss how two opposing adjudications can be arrived at by two judges in the small claims court.   

The decision in my case came down to there being nothing in Ryanair's Ts&Cs that justified a refund. Presumably the judge in the Blades case was more minded to take a 'common sense/just' point of view.

eskbanker

fatboy12 said:

I produced the adjudication as evidence in my case but the judge found in favour of Ryanair. It a mystery to me how two small claim court judges can differ in their adjudication when provided with the same evidence . I understand  the decision in the Blades v Ryanair action is not case law but I am at a loss how two opposing adjudications can be arrived at by two judges in the small claims court.   

Are you able and willing to share more details of the adjudication in your case, i.e. the basis on which the decision was reached?

lincroft1710

fatboy12 said:

I also lost my case against Ryanair because of flights I was unable to take in 2020 because of lockdown legislation. I booked flights in January 2020 to fly in September 2020. The  Welsh Government imposed lockdown legislation in September 2020 making it illegal for us to catch the flights. Ryanair refused a refund or a credit note because the flight had not been cancelled. After reading an article published on the MSE  website regarding a Mr. Blades winning his  case against Ryanair I decided to take Ryanair to the small claims court. Mr Blades was following government advice against non essential travel and decided not to fly, but Ryanair refused to refund him his ticket money. The judge found in favour of Mr. Blades. I produced the adjudication as evidence in my case but the judge found in favour of Ryanair. It a mystery to me how two small claim court judges can differ in their adjudication when provided with the same evidence . I understand  the decision in the Blades v Ryanair action is not case law but I am at a loss how two opposing adjudications can be arrived at by two judges in the small claims court.   

This is not really much different from appeal court procedures. A judge hears a case, makes a decision and subsequently the losing party appeals the judgement. Another judge (or judges) reviews the case, studies the same evidence and overturns the original decision. It boils down to the opinion of the judge based on the evidence they have heard or read. 

CKhalvashi

fatboy12 said:

I also lost my case against Ryanair because of flights I was unable to take in 2020 because of lockdown legislation. I booked flights in January 2020 to fly in September 2020. The  Welsh Government imposed lockdown legislation in September 2020 making it illegal for us to catch the flights. Ryanair refused a refund or a credit note because the flight had not been cancelled. After reading an article published on the MSE  website regarding a Mr. Blades winning his  case against Ryanair I decided to take Ryanair to the small claims court. Mr Blades was following government advice against non essential travel and decided not to fly, but Ryanair refused to refund him his ticket money. The judge found in favour of Mr. Blades. I produced the adjudication as evidence in my case but the judge found in favour of Ryanair. It a mystery to me how two small claim court judges can differ in their adjudication when provided with the same evidence . I understand  the decision in the Blades v Ryanair action is not case law but I am at a loss how two opposing adjudications can be arrived at by two judges in the small claims court.   

That court case was not senior enough to become case law.

A lot happened after the Mr Blades case. The largest was that the CMA refused to test their advice in court as they didn't feel they'd win. An Irish/Polish/Maltese (only 2 Ryanair Group aircraft were on the UK register in September 2020, that is still today only 17 of the many aircraft based in the UK) airline is not going to accept advice from a third country and will ensure the business operates to EU law in the respective jurisdiction.

As I recall saying at the time, Mr Blades was chancing his luck in any event. The seat was reserved and available for his use at all times and under the strict terms of the ticket was not refundable. All Ryanair had to do in law and contractually was ensure the flight went.