Channel 4 ordered to give Ryanair documents

Ryanair has accused broadcaster of defamation over fuel policy criticism

Mr Justice Michael Peart ruled the airline was entitled to all documents evidencing and/or recording all editorial decisions taken by the defendants during the course of making the programme
Mr Justice Michael Peart ruled the airline was entitled to all documents evidencing and/or recording all editorial decisions taken by the defendants during the course of making the programme

Channel Four Television and a film production company have been ordered to disclose to Ryanair documents used in researching and making editorial decisions for a programme critical of the airline's fuel policy.

The High Court made the disclosure orders in advance of Ryanair's action alleging defamation against the TV station and the programme producers, Blakeway Productions, over the August 12th, 2013 broadcast in which a number of pilots expressed criticisms of the company's fuel policy, which allegedly led to three emergency incidents at Valencia Airport, Spain, on July 26th, 2012.

The programme also alleged there was a failure by Ryanair on 12 occasions since 2005, to retain cockpit voice recordings, and there were criticisms of employment policy of the airline.

Ryanair claims the programme was defamatory and meant, in ordinary language or by innuendo, its employment practices and working conditions jeopardised safety of passengers by putting pilots under abnormal stress and pressure.

READ SOME MORE

Serious incident

It also claimed the broadcast wrongly meant Ryanair forces its pilots to fly with dangerously low fuel levels and that its fuel policy will lead to a crash or that a serious incident is inevitable.

The airline also alleges the broadcast wrongly meant Ryanair conceals the truth in order to prevent the proper investigation of incidents and is not a safe airline.

The defendants deny defamation and say the words complained of by Ryanair constitute a fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest.

They also say the words used meant there were reasonable grounds to investigate whether some of the practices and operating policies of Ryanair may have consequences for passenger safety.

The words were true in substance and fact, it is claimed.

The defendants have also pleaded the broadcast was meticulously investigated beforehand and the sources used were believed on good grounds to be credible and their accounts were supported where possible by independent investigation.

Ryanair sought orders from the court for discovery of documents used in the making the programme, which the defendants resisted.

Editorial decisions

Mr

Justice Michael Peart

ruled the airline was entitled to all documents evidencing and/or recording all editorial decisions taken by the defendants during the course of making the programme.

Ryanair was also entitled to documents evidencing and/or recording all research and investigation carried out into the subject of the programme.

It was further entitled to certain documents evidencing the “independent investigation” into the accounts of the defendants’ sources, he said.

He refused to order discovery of all documents used by the defendants as this was “far too general”.

In relation to a separate application for discovery of documents brought by the defendants against Ryanair, the judge ordered disclosure of certain categories of documents but said the period of time they related to was too long and he was placing a restriction on that time period to strike a balance between the parties.