From today's Telegraph:
Air fares could rise after ruling over night flights
By Paul Marston, transport correspondent (Filed: 02/10/2001)
CONSUMERS were warned yesterday that they could face higher air fares and later mail deliveries if the Government outlaws night flights to comply with a ruling of the European Court of Human Rights.
The court upheld a claim by eight residents of the Heathrow area that the sleep disruption resulting from night-time operations violated their right to "respect for private and family life" under the European Convention.
Environmental campaigners hailed the decision, suggesting that it could lead to a ban on flights between 11.30pm and 6am at all British airports. The judgment stopped short of advocating a ban, even at Heathrow.
It found that in setting the rules for night flights in 1993, the Government had "failed to strike a fair balance" between the economic value of the flights and their impact on local inhabitants.
Ministers, who are considering an appeal, will also explore whether palliative measures - such as trimming the number of night flights or paying compensation to the worst-affected residents - would satisfy the court. However, if a blanket ban was to be the outcome, it would have far-reaching implications for long-haul airlines at Heathrow, and charter operators elsewhere.
Night-flying is far more prevalent at Gatwick and Manchester, where holiday airlines need the flexibility of late arrivals and early departures to achieve the almost round-the-clock utilisation of aircraft which underpins low fares.
At Heathrow, there are on average 16 arrivals per night, almost all between 4.30am and 6am from Far East destinations such as Hong Kong and Bangkok. British Airways, which operates half these flights, said that because of international time differences and slot congestion at Heathrow, they would be difficult to reschedule.
The airline - already facing a crisis after the US terrorist attacks - estimated that dropping such flights would cost it £700 million a year in revenue, and undermine Heathrow's position as a worldwide hub. First-class mail and parcels could also be hit, as Consignia relies on 40 flights a night from a network of airports to ensure long-distance next-day deliveries.
The British Air Transport Association said: "The impact of a ban would be very severe. Airlines do not fly at night to annoy residents. They do so because there is not enough terminal and runway capacity to meet demand during the day."
The judgment said that while night flights made a contribution to the national economy, the Government should have conducted more research into their effect on sleep patterns before implementing the 1993 rules at Heathrow, which led to an overall increase in aircraft noise.
Among the residents who brought the case was Ruth Hatton, of East Sheen, south-west London, who said noise levels after 1993 were intolerable. She had been unable to sleep without ear plugs, and her children were frequently woken before 6am.
Peter Thake, who lives in Hounslow, west London, said nights were particularly difficult in the summer, because if he opened his windows the noise was worse, and if he did not, it was too hot to sleep.
The residents, who were each awarded £4,000 compensation, were supported by the Hacan ClearSkies anti-noise campaign group. John Stewart, the chairman, said a ban at Heathrow would happen within 18 months.
"This ruling has opened the way for residents' groups across Britain and Europe to challenge night flying."