Ireland’s Competition and Consumer Protection Commission has charged Ticketmaster Ireland with two offences under the Consumer Protection Act 2007 over Oasis ticket sales in 2024, alleging unclear pricing and misleading platinum ticket practices.

The first alleged offence accuses Ticketmaster of misleading customers by presenting “platinum” tickets in a way that could deceive the average consumer about the product’s main characteristics and influence a poor purchasing decision.

A second charge claims pricing information was provided in a manner that was unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous, or untimely.

Prosecutor Ronan Kennedy SC asked for a four-week adjournment to deal with disclosure and evidence, and the case was adjourned for mention to October 5, with efforts to set hearing dates before Christmas.

The case follows a CCPC investigation and is expected to be heavily contested, with the defence planning to call around a dozen witnesses and expert evidence.

Ticketmaster has said comments are limited while the case is before the courts and reaffirmed that there was no dynamic pricing or unfair practices, noting no determination has been made yet.

Ticketmaster Ireland says pricing transparency measures are standard practice, while the UK CMA’s earlier intervention secured commitments to improve pricing disclosure and transparency in similar cases.

The proceedings underscore ongoing regulatory scrutiny of dynamic or tiered pricing and platforms’ responsibility to disclose pricing clearly.

The Dublin District Court case, presided by Judge Anthony Halpin, is expected to be fully contested, with October 5 set for disclosure and witness preparation, possibly lasting three to four days.

The Oasis sale in 2024 drew sharp criticism over rapid price rises—standing tickets jumped from about €176 to over €400 at peak—amid claims of dynamic pricing and Platinum labeling.

The Irish case runs parallel to a UK CMA inquiry that led to commitments on price transparency and the elimination of misleading labels, with Ticketmaster later stopping the Platinum label in the UK.

The case is viewed as a potential test of whether Platinum inventory and price presentation constitute illegal misleading practices distinct from the UK outcome.