BA trial collapses after emails found

Virgin Atlantic denied withholding evidence from a price-fixing trial of airline executives, which collapsed yesterday amid bitter recriminations.

In an embarrassing move, the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) halted its prosecution of four British Airways managers following the discovery of 70,000 previously undisclosed but potentially relevant emails, many sent by a key prosecution witness - Virgin Atlantic's director of corporate affairs Paul Moore.

The OFT indicated information in the emails would not necessarily have led to the abandonment of its prosecution, which it insisted was justified.

It said it would review whether to take action against Virgin Atlantic, the airline founded by Sir Richard Branson, in its search for justice for victims of price-fixing.

Airline passengers are estimated to have paid £35 million ($72 million) over the odds in fuel surcharges because BA and Virgin Atlantic colluded on prices between August 2004 and January 2006.

BA was fined £148 million by the US Justice Department and £121.5 million by the OFT, but Virgin Atlantic escaped any penalty because it blew the whistle on BA and co-operated in a criminal case brought against four BA executives.

Yesterday the four men - Andrew Crawley, BA's sales and marketing director; Martin George, a former commercial director; Iain Burns, a former head of communications; and Alan Burnett, a former head of UK sales - were found not guilty by a jury at Southwark Crown Court.

On Friday, Judge Justice Owen complained that important emails dating back to 2005 were missing, including one from May 2005 which showed Virgin Atlantic had raised its surcharge from £5 to £6 without contacting BA, indicating the collusion was not as far-reaching as the OFT claimed.

Yesterday, Richard Latham, QC, prosecuting for the OFT, said 70,000 emails were found last week which had not been disclosed, some 12,000 of which were sent or received by Moore.

Virgin Atlantic maintained that it had "fully assisted" the OFT and denied suggestions it had not complied with its obligations as an immunity applicant.

- INDEPENDENT