Ryanair delays in Italy: do Irish judges really decide on refunds?

Regulation 1215/2012 does not help either: it introduces a special rule in the case of contracts concluded by consumers, in favour of the latter with regard to jurisdiction, but only applies to contracts of carriage that provide for services combined with accommodation.

But what then are the practical repercussions of the Supreme Court's ruling on Italian travellers flying with Ryanair? From now on, it will be more difficult, if not impossible, to assert one's rights before an Italian judge?

And to get a refund denied by Ryanair will it be necessary to rely on an Irish lawyer, with the added costs this entails?

The reality, fortunately, is more nuanced. The disruptive scope of Judgment 8802/2025 must be interpreted.

"A careful reading of the grounds, in fact, reveals how it is likely that the abusiveness with which Ryanair imposes the acceptance of the clause of exclusivity of Irish jurisdiction at the time of the purchase of the ticket was not objected to in the judgement - explains Andrea Giordano, a lawyer expert in transport law and co-founder of RimborsamiTu - : this clause has always been held to be peacefully abusive, as non-negotiable and lacking express consent separate from the generic acceptance of the Terms and Conditions".

It is therefore reasonable that the scope of this judgement should be reduced in view of the abundant case law that has always expressed itself positively on the abusive nature of such a clause, Giordano continues.

"Furthermore the Court of Justice of the European Union, whose rulings are hierarchically superior to those of national courts, in Case C-519/19 it declared the unfairness of such clauses inserted in contracts between companies and consumers without having been individually negotiated and which attribute exclusive jurisdiction to the court in whose jurisdiction the company's head office is located," Giordano points out, "because they determine, to the detriment of the consumer, a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising from the contract.

This finding allows one to look optimistically at passengers' rights, the lawyer concludes, suggesting that, once the constant jurisprudence on the unfairness of the clause has been recalled, 'the judges will want to take the Cassazione's ruling into proper consideration, continuing to ensure that Italian consumers can assert their rights in Italy'.