Repeat Offender Ryanair Again Convicted for Unlawful Competition and Denigration Against eDreams ODIGEO
Ryanair ordered by the Court to issue a public retraction recognising that eDreams Prime offers discounts to consumers.
This ruling follows interim measures issued by the same Court last year, which were disobeyed by Ryanair, leading to an unprecedented criminal warning against the airline.
BARCELONA, Spain, July 21, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--eDreams ODIGEO (hereinafter, 'the Company' or 'eDO'), the world's leading travel subscription company, today welcomed yet another significant legal victory against Ryanair. The Barcelona Commercial Court No. 12 found Ryanair D.A.C. guilty of unlawful competition and denigration against eDO, adding to the airline's extensive track record of convictions for this illegal behaviour.
The ruling conclusively established that Ryanair's denigrating claims about eDO and its Prime subscription, part of an aggressive and continued campaign initiated by the airline in 2023, are untrue. As the Court noted, this campaign was disseminated through Ryanair's websites, press releases, social media, and in public statements from its top executives, including Ryanair CEO Michael O'Leary. The ruling found that these claims were in reality issued with the aim of undermining a key competitor. Consequently, the Court has issued a permanent injunction obligating Ryanair to cease its denigratory campaign, remove all denigratory content from all platforms, and issue a public retraction.
Ryanair forced to publicly admit eDreams Prime offers savings after years of untruthful claims
As a significant remedy, the Court has mandated that Ryanair publish a public retraction on its own website and social media channels for a period of six months. This forced retraction explicitly requires Ryanair to admit the value of eDreams Prime after its years-long campaign denigrating the service with claims now deemed illegal and untrue.
Notably, the Court orders Ryanair to publish: "Ryanair recognises that eDreams Prime is a legitimate subscription service that offers consumers savings on flights, hotels, packages and car rentals."
This decision follows an interim order from the same Court last summer. In that prior ruling, the Court had already found Ryanair's attacks to be a "perfectly organised campaign designed to promote the Ryanair website for booking flights and associated services" and ordered the airline to immediately cease its conduct. However, in a display of defiance, Ryanair repeatedly breached those measures and continued its smear campaign, which ultimately led the Court to issue a formal criminal warning against the airline for disobedience, warning of potential criminal charges if its conduct continued.
Ryanair's appeal of these interim measures was also fully rejected by a higher court, the Provincial Court of Barcelona. In its June decision and based on evidence presented, the higher court stated that in "the majority of cases, [eDreams Prime prices] are more advantageous than those offered by Ryanair." The Provincial Court therefore rejected the appeal, concluding that with the "available evidence it cannot be sustained that the offensive claims used by Ryanair are truthful."
This latest legal victory by eDreams ODIGEO also builds upon a previous definitive ruling from Spain's Supreme Court—a decision reached after Ryanair's appeals were systematically rejected at all prior court instances—which had already mandated Ryanair to cease its denigrating and anti-competitive behaviour towards eDreams ODIGEO. Ryanair has also been convicted for denigrating actions and unfair competition against other independent travel agents.
Guillaume Teissonnière, General Counsel at eDreams ODIGEO said: "For Ryanair, this must feel like a broken record. 'Déjà vu' doesn't even begin to cover it. Time and again, courts have resoundingly condemned their denigration tactics. Their motive is transparent: to unfairly crush competition. Enough is truly enough. Ryanair must finally abandon these bullying methods, compete fairly on the merits and adhere to the law. It's long overdue."
eDreams ODIGEO remains dedicated to upholding fair competition within the travel industry and safeguarding the interests of travellers.
-ENDS-
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250721920403/en/
Contacts
E: edreamspressoffice@instinctif.com T: +(44)07876745530 / +(44)2074572383
Inicia sesión para acceder a tu cartera de valores
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox Sports
6 hours ago
- Fox Sports
Barcelona honors Kobe Bryant with new jersey bearing brand logo
Associated Press BARCELONA, Spain (AP) — Spanish soccer club Barcelona is paying tribute to NBA legend Kobe Bryant with its second uniform launched Tuesday. The five-time European champion said its new jersey will replace the usual Nike swoosh logo 'with the 'Kobe Sheath' — the sword in the sheath logo that identifies the Kobe Bryant brand.' Barcelona said the club had a special relationship with Bryant, who died in a helicopter crash in Southern California in 2020. He made appearances alongside club members and first-team players during his visits to Barcelona and when the club visited the United States. 'The shorts are black with Persian violet details and a textured snakeskin outline, a reference to the Black Mamba alter ego of Kobe,' Barcelona said. The change, made in collaboration with Nike, will last three seasons. 'All in all, it is part of a brand collaboration between the NBA legend and FC Barcelona that is born out of a shared culture of sporting excellence that characterized Bryant and is also part of FC Barcelona's DNA,' the club said. 'This agreement aims to keep alive that notion of brotherhood and at the same time create a link between Kobe fans and FC Barcelona to make the global impact of the American's legacy even greater amongst the sporting community and fans." ___ AP soccer: recommended Item 1 of 2
Boston Globe
7 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Nantucket demands accountability from Vineyard Wind after offshore wind turbine blade collapse last year
'In the aftermath of the blade failure, (Vineyard Wind) increases the likelihood that they will, again, be unprepared for disaster, and they leave our community vulnerable to future project failures,' Mohr said. Advertisement The announcement comes on the heels of a After the During the permitting process for Vineyard Wind in 2020, federal law did not give localities the power of veto; the town instead negotiated a community benefits agreement, a contract between Nantucket and the developer that is enforceable in court. Advertisement Vineyard Wind, town officials said, has not met the outlined expectations in the agreement, like its commitment to 'proactive communications' from the turbines' development to maintenance. 'We're here today, because the company has repeatedly failed to fulfill the communications obligation of the (community benefits agreement) during times of both regular operations, and critically, during times of emergency,' said Greg Werkheiser, an attorney hired by the town to handle cases involving the wind projects. 'Prior to initiating any litigation, we are giving the company an opportunity to comply with its legal requirements,' Werkheiser added. Vineyard Wind, the offshore energy project's developer, is owned by Denmark-based Avangrid Renewables and Copenhagen Infrastructure in partnership with Spain-based Iberdrola, did not respond to a request for comment. The town also cited concerns about light pollution. The community benefit agreement required the developer to install an 'automatic detection and lighting system," which only turns on lights when it detects a plane or ship in the vicinity. 'Due to lengthy delays in (Vineyard Wind's) activation of the required lighting reduction system on their turbines, they have been polluting our night sky with dozens of blinking red lights for several years now,' Mohr said. In its demands, the town said Vineyard Wind should compensate Nantucket with $25,000 per turbine, each day that the turbine lights are on without activating this system. The community benefits agreement has come under fire by some Nantucket residents, who say town officials are restricted in their criticism of Vineyard Wind. An advocacy group Keep Nantucket Wild submitted a petition to the select board last year, with more than 2,000 signatures, urging the town to withdraw from the agreement. Advertisement But, Mohr said withdrawing from the agreement would 'weaken our town's position' when it came to making demands, calling it 'the most effective legal tool' the town has. They urged Vineyard Wind to respond to the list of demands within two weeks. Nantucket did not comment on what actions it would take if the developer does not follow through. The demands come at a trying time for offshore wind projects. President Donald Trump rolled back clean energy incentives in the newly passed The town has consistently said that clean energy is 'a priority for the world,' according to Werkheiser. The town just wants to see these projects comply with outlined requirements, and exert as much influence as this industry develops, Mohr said. 'We're on the leading edge of a new industry in this country,' Mohr said. 'We literally are on the leading edge of it, physically and geographically.' Material from the Associated Press was used in this report. Jessica Ma can be reached at
10 hours ago
Nantucket officials accuse offshore wind developer of going into hiding since Trump's election
BOSTON -- Officials in Massachusetts' Nantucket island on Tuesday accused the developer of the nation's first utility-scale offshore wind project of not responding to their safety queries since Donald Trump's election after a massive wind turbine broke apart last year and its fragments washed up on beaches. Nantucket's select board gave Vineyard Wind two weeks to respond to a list of demands, including that it follow deadline requirements for notifying local officials of emergencies. Violations could result in fines up to $250,000, the town said, although it was unclear how such a policy would be enforced. Board member Brooke Mohr suggested the Trump administration's skepticism toward offshore wind projects is to blame for what Mohr said was Vineyard Wind's lack of communication. The town said Vineyard Wind, which is owned by Denmark-based Avangrid Renewables and Copenhagen Infrastructure in partnership with Spain-based Iberdrola, has failed to respond to private requests for changes to its protocols. Litigation may be a next step if the town's demands are unmet, officials said. 'We believe that they are concerned about the change in policy at the federal level and drawing scrutiny from the new administration, which has ordered a review of offshore wind permitting practices,' Mohr said during a virtual briefing with news reporters. 'However, hiding is not the solution to their problems, nor is it the solution to our problems.' Vineyard Wind did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent by The Associated Press. The project about 14 miles (23 kilometers) off nearby Martha's Vineyard was approved by President Joe Biden's administration in May 2021, a key step in Biden's plans to increase U.S. reliance on offshore wind by 2030. Fiberglas fragments of a massive wind turbine blade that broke apart off Nantucket began washing ashore last summer during the peak of tourist season after pieces of the blade at the Vineyard Wind project began falling into the Atlantic Ocean in July. GE Vernova, which agreed to pay $10.5 million in a settlement earlier this month to compensate island businesses that suffered losses as a result of the blade failure, blamed a manufacturing problem at one of its factories in Canada and said there was no indication of a design flaw. It reinspected all blades made at the factory and removed other blades made there from the Vineyard Wind location. In the final days of the Biden administration, federal regulators lifted a suspension order on the project, pending the removal of all installed blades manufactured by GE Vernova. On Tuesday, town officials accused Vineyard Wind of violating a contract made with Nantucket five years ago that requires the company to communicate regularly with the town at all stages of project development and deployment. It also said Vineyard Wind hasn't done enough to reduce light pollution or engage the town with its emergency response plans following the blade failure. Nantucket officials refused to include Vineyard Wind as a signatory in the $10.5 million settlement, citing the company's 'lack of leadership, transparency, and stewardship' following the blade failure.
