Cardiff: General Airport Discussion & Updates

[Qing4theloo]

The 14 days within which BRS had to appeal the decision has now expired. I wonder if that decision had any bearing on the BRS CEO terminating his post.

IMO It's now looking likely that it did, and that the decision not to appeal came from the owners (or maybe the lawyers?)
"Flounce off stage left ... "

 

[Jerry]

IMO It's now looking likely that it did, and that the decision not to appeal came from the owners (or maybe the lawyers?)
"Flounce off stage left ... "

Probably the legal advice was against appealing because they couldn't find anything to appeal against. If they had they'd have appealed I'm sure. I suppose it's unlikely we'll ever know if losing the case was the reason the CEO stood down or it was part of it or there was something else.

 

[CAN&I]

The 14 days within which BRS had to appeal the decision has now expired. I wonder if that decision had any bearing on the BRS CEO terminating his post. Another factor could be the change of ownership at BRS, the Toronto Teachers Pension Fund, having sold BRS to Mcquaire Investment Fund of Australia.

Unfortunately there is another week to go for Bristol Airport to lodge its application request to submit appeal proceedings at the Court of Appeal. (see point 2 below).

Taken from the CAT Order issued 09/04/2026:
2. The Applicant shall, if so advised, file any applicaiton for permission to appeal by 4pm on 28 April 2026.
3. Any response to an application pursuant to paragraph 2 above shall be filed by 4pm on 10 May 2026.

(EDIT: Copy of original CAT document removed from the post 24/04/2026 to save storage space)

 

[geoff]

That's disappointing I'm sure I read an appeal had to be lodged within 14 days, obviously I was wrong. Sorry for my mistake.

 

[CAN&I]

That's disappointing I'm sure I read an appeal had to be lodged within 14 days, obviously I was wrong. Sorry for my mistake.

Don't worry. Some media sources quoted 14 days "to lodge an appeal" for whatever reason, which is odd because the CAT guidelines stipulate 21 days to request CAT permission to lodge proceedings at the Court of Appeal.

Even if BRS decide to go for it having (in their view) found a point of law to hang their request against, because the CAT judgement was a judiciary decision its still up to CAT to grant or decline permission to take the matter forward.

Its dificult to see an appeal happening given 1) the previous "no" across all counts of complaint and redress alongside the comprehensive reasoning against all points, 2) BRS' decision to part company with Dave Lees 10 days after the outcome (its unlikely he'll be around when any appeal is heard) and 3) BRS' legal team were found wanting in quite a few areas of both argument and evidence when it came to their original submission.

Having said that, who knows where Bristol Airport and Dave Lees are concerned, unless the board have already said a flat "no"?

(NOTE FOR ADMIN - have removed the CAT attachment mentioned so not to take up storage space)

 

[Jarvo]

Sorry to jump up to a previous line of comments, but APD..... I'm sure I could google this, but there's so much knowledge in this forum, it's more interesting by far to place this here....
If the UK gov decided to give the powers to WG tomorrow, I understand that money would come out of WG budget.
If the total is 1m /2 x £15 at roughly £7.5m and the Welsh Gov decided to then decrease the cost to 0, in the next settlement would that original £7.5m be deducted or would the deduction be based upon passenger numbers (assuming they'd increase post reduction) so the WG being potentially £10m lower next cycle and so on if pax numbers exploded?

If it's the original 7.5m ammount, then while at a lower pax level, the sooner the better surely?

 

[CAN&I]

Sorry to jump up to a previous line of comments, but APD..... I'm sure I could google this, but there's so much knowledge in this forum, it's more interesting by far to place this here....
If the UK gov decided to give the powers to WG tomorrow, I understand that money would come out of WG budget.
If the total is 1m /2 x £15 at roughly £7.5m and the Welsh Gov decided to then decrease the cost to 0, in the next settlement would that original £7.5m be deducted or would the deduction be based upon passenger numbers (assuming they'd increase post reduction) so the WG being potentially £10m lower next cycle and so on if pax numbers exploded?

If it's the original 7.5m ammount, then while at a lower pax level, the sooner the better surely?

You'll not be surprised by this answer BUT… it’s as simple as its complicated! 🤓

HM Treasury income from APD applied to passengers travelling to and from Wales, via airports in Wales, is not separately broken down in the national statistics by HMRC.

The only "qualified" number we have is the £6million estimate provided by Rebecca Evans to the House of Commons Select Committee in 2019, i.e. that the adjustments made to the Welsh Block Grant “would reflect APD, which the latest estimates by HMRC for 2017–18 show was in the region of £6 million”.

Taking this number, if APD was abolished, HM Treasury would lose £6million in income pa, therefore Wales would (in theory!) lose an equivalent £6 million each year from the Block Grant.

Simple answer so far. However, there's three things to bear in mind.

1) The "£6million" stated was disputed at the time as being closer to "£13million", depending on which source or political party was involved.

2) The figures refer to the tax-year 2017-18 as c1.5 million passengers passed through Cardiff Airport, a period which skewed slightly more towards low-cost travel (Flybe, Ryanair, Vueling) than charter (TUI, Thomas Cook), the reverse being true today of course. The rates for passenger duty have also changed since then, as has the number and mixture of passengers.

3) Critically, adjustments to the Barnett Formula post-Brexit also means the "like-for-like" calculation isn't as it was back in 2019 (and even then the statement made by Rebecca Evans was simplified). Today, a reduction of £6million income to HM Treasury would (in theory) be adjusted downwards by the formula.

In summary, and for the benefit of simplicity, revenue lost by HM Treasury would be duly reflected in an equal reduction to the Block Grant settlement.

In reality, while the calculation is more nuanced, the principle is the same.

Finally, the Barnett Formula calculation would be based on actual HM Treasury income over previous financial years, not forecasts of future growth, income or passenger numbers.

The above of course assumes APD would be abolished. Should the Welsh Government retain APD in line with the UK or alternatively retain but set its own rates, the same principles would apply.

Hope this makes sense.

 

[geoff]

Poster on Pprune states that BRS have submitted their new expansion plans to the relevant local authority. The list is extensive, and includes plans for runway extension, terminal extension, runway lights on common land etc, with the aim of catering for 15 million passengers. I would think they will face quite a lot of local opposition to the p

 

[Jerry]

Poster on Pprune states that BRS have submitted their new expansion plans to the relevant local authority. The list is extensive, and includes plans for runway extension, terminal extension, runway lights on common land etc, with the aim of catering for 15 million passengers. I would think they will face quite a lot of local opposition to the p

Will be interesting to see if the Welsh government puts in any objections.

 

[Barry Man]

Link to Brs planning application

26/P/0686/OU2 | Hybrid planning application (full and outline elements) with Environmental Statement for the expansion of Bristol Airport to enable a throughput of 15 million passengers per annum, operating within a rolling 12 month

planning.n-somerset.gov.uk

 

[Foxlimayankee]

Will be interesting to see if the Welsh government puts in any objections.

They could certainly put an attempt, but even if they dont put an official objection in they could run the narrative of available capacity at CWL, and EXT, which could support any opposition fights. That would be a good marketing opportunity to highlight options from CWL.

 

[Birmingham Aviation]

There’s no thread on here for Ryanair so I thought I’d let you know Ryanair have loaded its 2026 winter sale on

Alicante 3 weekly
Dublin 5 weekly
Tenerife 1 weekly

 

[Foxlimayankee]

Now that all schedules are on sale for 2026 here is the break down of seats on offer for scheduled & charter airlines:



Total seats on sale: 1.243m



TUI: 641,820 (Based on 737-800 short haul)

Ryanair: 299,754 (Based on 737-800)

KLM: 137,240 (Based on 1x E75 & 1x E90)

Vueling: 87,120 (Based on A320ceo)

Aer Lingus: 53,820 (Including Rugby flights to DUB)

Westjet: 22,620

Loganair: 864 (Based on ATR Rugby flights)



More seats may be on offer if A320neo and 737max are used.

This doesn't include other ad-hoc charter/ rugby airlift flights.



As a comparison 2025 saw 1.07m seats on sale.

1m passengers should easily be achievable for 2026.

 

[Jerry]

Good to see. Maybe being ambitious but it would be great to see the airport break the 1.1 million barrier which would be roughly 85% of the seats onsale being sold.

 

[Qing4theloo]

Taken from the CAT Order issued 09/04/2026:
2. The Applicant shall, if so advised, file any application for permission to appeal by 4pm on 28 April 2026.

Now that the real deadline has passed, presumably there hasn't been an application for permission to appeal in the last week or so? (I have been away ... )

 

[Jerry]

Now that the real deadline has passed, presumably there hasn't been an application for permission to appeal in the last week or so? (I have been away ... )

I don't think there has. I suspect it would be in the news if they had appealed.

 

[CAN&I]

Now that the real deadline has passed, presumably there hasn't been an application for permission to appeal in the last week or so? (I have been away ... )

Nothing in the media or via any of the parties involved so far.

Unless Bristol Airport chooses to state its intentions publicly, we won’t know for sure whether it has sought permission to appeal until the CAT issues its own update. That update must be published by 4pm on Sunday(!) 10th May 2026.

While the CAT’s response may confirm outright whether permission is granted or otherwise, an update is more likely to acknowledge the request and set out the next steps — for example, inviting Welsh Ministers to file their written response before the Tribunal considers all submissions and reaches a decision later.

If nothing further emerges from any party between now and 11th May, we can then assume the matter is closed.

 

[Jerry]

I entered New Zealand earlier today and noticed this before biosecurity. Haven't used Cardiff Airport for a while but I think a big bilingual map of Wales at arrivals would look great.

 

[CAN&I]

IT IS ORDERED THAT:
2. The Applicant shall, if so advised, file any application for permission to appeal by 4pmon 28 April 2026.
3. Any response to an application pursuant to paragraph 2 above shall be filed by 4pm on10 May 2026.​

Nothing in the media or via any of the parties involved so far.

Unless Bristol Airport chooses to state its intentions publicly, we won’t know for sure whether it has sought permission to appeal until the CAT issues its own update. That update must be published by 4pm on Sunday(!) 10th May 2026.

While the CAT’s response may confirm outright whether permission is granted or otherwise, an update is more likely to acknowledge the request and set out the next steps — for example, inviting Welsh Ministers to file their written response before the Tribunal considers all submissions and reaches a decision later.

If nothing further emerges from any party between now and 11th May, we can then assume the matter is closed.

As per the CAT Order of Judgment, nothing has been filed online as of 4pm today, 10th May 2026.

Guess we’ll have to wait and see over the next 24–48 hours whether anything changes, or whether the matter can finally be put to rest.

 

[geoff]

Now that the election is over, and the legal proceedings with BRS terminating perhaps we might hear some positive news from CWL regarding future routes, and possibly cargo services, the appointment of the new cargo expert to the board of the airport, as a non executive director should certainly help matters.