RYANAIR HAS “SINCERELY and unreservedly apologised” before the High Court to a quantity surveyor who claimed that he had been wrongly banned from flying with the airline.

Eoin Michael Cahill sued the airline who he said had defamed him after it wrongly accused him of engaging in disruptive behaviour on a date earlier this year which he neither travelled on a Ryanair flight nor was he present at Dublin Airport.

He also claimed that he had been defamed by Ryanair after it wrote to his employer informing it of the ban.

Today, Mr Justice Rory Mulcahy was informed that Ryanair wished to apologised to Cahill and that the flight ban that was “incorrectly imposed” on him “has been withdrawn.”

The airline said that Cahill had been “mistakenly identified” as a disruptive passenger alleged to have been involved in an altercation with the airline’s staff, which required the assistance of Airport Police, on 2 January last.

The airline represented by Martin Hayden SC, said it accepts that Cahill was not this passenger, has offered to make amends to Cahill and to correct the record with the plaintiff’s employer.

It has offered to write a letter to his employer stating that the message it sent to Cahill’s employers was inaccurate and that all the allegations it made against the plaintiff were “fully withdrawn.”

It has also offered to pay Cahill €10,000 compensation plus his legal costs as may be agreed.

In his action, Cahill said he is employed by the Jones Engineering Group, and is currently working on a project in Copenhagen, Denmark.

He claimed that the flights he takes between Denmark and Ireland are purchased by his employer.

He was due to fly with Ryanair from Dublin to Copenhagen on 2 January, but after extending his leave, did not travel on that date.

The following day (3 January last) he claims he was defamed in an email sent to his employer by Ryanair’s customer services.

The email, he claimed, contained a false and untenable allegation that he was “disruptive” on his journey through Dublin Airport and that he was prohibited from flying with Ryanair again.

He claimed that what had happened to him would have disastrous implications on his professional reputation, especially as has to travel to Denmark as part of his job.

Represented by Paul O’Higgins SC, instructed by solicitor CW Ashe and Company, Cahill brought proceedings seeking an injunction requiring Ryanair to correct the record with his employer, and to lift the travel ban placed on him.

In his proceedings against both Ryanair DAC and Ryanair Holdings PLC, Cahill, with an address at Carrigban, Killarney Road, Macroom, Co Cork, also sought damages, including aggravated damages for the alleged defamation.

In correspondence with Cahill, the airline also said that it had asked for time to complete an investigation into the allegations before seeking an injunction late last month against Ryanair.

It claimed that Cahill had not given the airline ample time to fully investigate the matter, and disputed the plaintiff’s claims that the matter was urgent.

While it accepted Cahill’s annoyance and upset, the airline said that it takes the issue of disruptive passengers very seriously given the impact such incidents have on passengers and staff,

Cahill’s lawyers rejected Ryanair’s arguments and said that the airline has had ample time to address his complaints, but had failed to do so.

Ryanair had known about his complaints about the ban and the message to his employer since early January, and had not addressed his concerns Cahill’s lawyers submitted.

After hearing argument from both sides, Mr Justice Mulcahy agreed that the airline had known about Cahill’s complaint for some time before it completed its investigation and said that the plaintiff was entitled to his legal costs of the injunction proceedings against the defendants.